2018 (12) TMI 1966 - HC - Indian Laws

Robbery - white colour Hundai Verna Car - cash - corroboration of facts - It is contended that Appellant has financial stringency - HELD THAT - Court has to consider the circumstances of the case nature of offence and character of the offender while exercising the power which is discretionary. Powers under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act vest with the Court when any person is found guilty of the offence committed not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. This power can be exercised by the Court even at appellate or Revisional stage. Though the Appellant has been convicted under Sections 411 and 482 of the IPC but in the facts and circumstances of the present case and after considering the nature of the offence the character of the offender the report of the Probationary Officer the Appellant herein leading a disciplined life on the reformed path and the Appellant having a fixed place of abode this is a fit case for extending the benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act to the Appellant. While confirming the conviction of appellant under Section 411 and 482 of IPC it is directed that he be released on probation on entering into a bond within a period of two weeks from today in the sum of Rs. 10, 000/- with one surety of like amount before the concerned trial Court for keeping peace and good behaviour for a period of one year. In case Appellant does not maintain good conduct during the period of probation then he shall be liable to undergo the substantive sentence as awarded by the Trial Court - Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Conviction under sections 411/482 IPC and sentencing.
2. Evidence presented by the prosecution.
3. Appellant's challenge to conviction and sentence.
4. Application under section 360 Cr.P.C. and section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act.
5. Consideration of probation for the Appellant.

Issue 1: Conviction under sections 411/482 IPC and sentencing:
The judgment highlighted the conviction of the Appellant under sections 411/482 IPC for possessing a stolen car with a fake number plate. The Appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fined for the respective offences.

Issue 2: Evidence presented by the prosecution:
The prosecution presented a case involving multiple accused individuals and witnesses. The evidence included witness testimonies, disclosure statements, recovery of stolen property, and the involvement of the accused in the robbery. The prosecution's case was supported by testimonies of witnesses, including police officers and investigators.

Issue 3: Appellant's challenge to conviction and sentence:
The Appellant challenged the conviction and sentence through an appeal. The Appellant sought relief under section 360 Cr.P.C. and section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, citing personal circumstances and responsibilities as the sole breadwinner of a family with financial constraints.

Issue 4: Application under section 360 Cr.P.C. and section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act:
The Appellant applied for the benefit of probation under section 360 Cr.P.C. and section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. The probation officer's report highlighted the Appellant's responsible nature, lack of prior criminal history, and family circumstances, recommending probation based on the individual's character and behavior.

Issue 5: Consideration of probation for the Appellant:
The Court considered various factors, including the nature of the offence, character of the offender, probation officer's report, and the philosophy behind probation as noted in legal precedents. Despite confirming the conviction, the Court extended the benefit of probation under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act to the Appellant, requiring a bond for good behavior for a specified period.

This comprehensive analysis covers the key issues addressed in the judgment, detailing the legal proceedings, evidence presented, challenges raised, and the Court's decision regarding the Appellant's probation application.