Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pawan Kumar and ors. Vs. State

Pawan Kumar and ors. vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Mar 22, 2004
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/685328

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Revision Petition 120/1999 and CRL.M.A. 2379/1999
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - 5. Having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offenders, it is considered expedient to release them on probation of good conduct. 5,000/- (rupees five thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to appear and receive sentence as and wh...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Sections 4; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34 and 448

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pawan Kumar and ors.

Advocate Sanjay Sharma, Adv

Respondent

State

Advocate Richa Kapoor, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Sections 4; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34 and 448
Reported In
2004CriLJ2310; 110(2004)DLT611; 2004(75)DRJ84

Excerpt

- - 5. having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offenders, it is considered expedient to release them on probation of good conduct. 5,000/- (rupees five thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to appear and receive sentence as and when called upon during such period and, in the meantime, the petitioners shall keep peace and be of good behavior......that the incident took place as far back as on 1993. the petitioners have been facing the ordeal of trial for over 11 years and there has been no untoward incident nor any complaint against them. learned counsel for the state submits that in the facts and circumstances of this case she would not be averse to the benefits of the probation of offenders act being extended to the petitioners.3. having heard learned counsel for the parties and having given my careful consideration to the material available on record, i am of the view that in the present case, the petitioners have suffered the agony of trial lasting for about 11 years. besides that, they are in judicial custody and there is no allegation that the petitioners are previous convicts.4. keeping these circumstances in mind and the fact that the offence of which the petitioners have been convicted is not punishable with life imprisonment, they deserve the benefit of probation under section 4 of the probation of offenders act, 1958. in these circumstances, while maintaining the conviction of the petitioners, the sentence of imprisonment and fine as awarded to them is set aside. 5. having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offenders, it is considered expedient to release them on probation of good conduct. it is, thereforee, directed that the petitioners be released for a period of six months on their entering into a personal bond in the sum of rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to appear and receive sentence as and when called upon during such period and, in the meantime, the petitioners shall keep peace and be of good behavior. the requisite bonds to be furnished by the petitioners with the sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court/cmm. the bonds are directed to be furnished be furnished within a period of two weeks failing which the sentence awarded by the trial court shall come into effect......

Full Judgment

R.S. Sodhi, J.

1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 15.2.1999 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Delhi in Crl.A.14/1998 whereby the learned Judge dismissed the appeal while upholding the order of conviction, which appeal arose out of the order dated 7.10.1998 of the Metropolitan Magistrate whereby the learned Magistrate has held the appellant/petitioners herein guilty under Section 448/34 IPC and sentenced them to a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for 30 days each.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he does not wish to challenge the conviction on merits but submits that this is a fit case where accused who are first offenders and have already deposited the fine can be considered and admitted to the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act. He submits that the incident took place as far back as on 1993. The petitioners have been facing the ordeal of trial for over 11 years and there has been no untoward incident nor any complaint against them. Learned counsel for the State submits that in the facts and circumstances of this case she would not be averse to the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act being extended to the petitioners.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having given my careful consideration to the material available on record, I am of the view that in the present case, the petitioners have suffered the agony of trial lasting for about 11 years. Besides that, they are in judicial custody and there is no allegation that the petitioners are previous convicts.

4. Keeping these circumstances in mind and the fact that the offence of which the petitioners have been convicted is not punishable with life imprisonment, they deserve the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. In these circumstances, while maintaining the conviction of the petitioners, the sentence of imprisonment and fine as awarded to them is set aside.

5. Having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offenders, it is considered expedient to release them on probation of good conduct. It is, thereforee, directed that the petitioners be released for a period of six months on their entering into a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to appear and receive sentence as and when called upon during such period and, in the meantime, the petitioners shall keep peace and be of good behavior. The requisite bonds to be furnished by the petitioners with the sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court/CMM. The bonds are directed to be furnished be furnished within a period of two weeks failing which the sentence awarded by the trial court shall come into effect. The fine which has already been paid is ordered to be treated as litigation expenses to the State.

6.With this modification, the order under challenge is upheld. The petition stands disposed of. Crl.M.A.2379/1999 is also disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial