logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Jhar HC 180 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Jharkhand
Case No : Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 05 of 2019
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
Parties : Amol Yadav & Others Versus The State of Jharkhand
Appearing Advocates : For the Appellants: Ranjan Kr. Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent: Jitendra Pandey, A.P.P.
Date of Judgment : 04-05-2026
Head Note :-
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Sections 3/4 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 JHHC 13090,
Judgment :-

1. Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Jitendra Pandey, learned counsel for the State.

2. The present criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.12.2018 passed in Sessions Trial No. 102 of 2007, arising out of Pathargama P.S. Case No. 14 of 2006 (G.R. No.67 of 2006) by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Godda, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 323/ 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years for the offence under Section 147 IPC and for the offence under Sections 323/ 149, they have sentenced to undergo R.I for one year with fine of Rs.1,000/- each with default clause. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants has confined his prayer to the extent that in spite of the fact that it is their first offence and further there is no criminal history, still the benefits of Sections 3/4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 has not been granted to the appellants and as such prayer has been made that the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act, may be extended to the appellants.

4. A report has been called for the concerned Probation Officer vide order dated 08.04.2026.

                  From perusal of the report, submitted by the Probation Officer, Godda, it appears that the conduct and behaviour of the appellants is good. The parties are related and as such the recommendation has been made that the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 may be extended to the present appellants.

5. Considering the nature of allegation, the relationship between the parties and the report of the Probation Officer, Godda, the benefits of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 is, hereby, extended to the appellants.

6. The appellants are directed to execute a bond of good behaviour for the period of six months.

7. With the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, the present appeal stands disposed of.

8. Let the Trial Court Records be sent back to the Court concerned forthwith, along with the copy of this Judgment.
 
  CDJLawJournal