No Bar Under Law To Extend Benefit Of Probation To Convict Of Above 21 Years Age: Rajasthan HC
|The Rajasthan High Court observed that there is no bar under law to extend the benefit of probation to convict of above 21 years age.
In this case, the accused had been convicted and sentenced under Sections 307, 34, and 323 of IPC in 1993. They prayed for the grant of benefit of probation under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (the Act).
The accused had submitted that they were “living peacefully in the society without there being any criminal antecedents to their discredit.” It was further argued that “from the last 33 years, the accused-appellants are facing mental agony and harassment because of pendency of criminal case registered against them.”
The trial court had rejected the prayer of the accused regarding the grant of leniency under the Act.
A Single Bench of Justice Ganesh Ram Meena observed, “The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the said Act explains the rationale for the enactment and its amendments: to give the benefit of release of offenders on probation of good conduct instead of sentencing them to imprisonment. Thus, increasing emphasis on the reformation and rehabilitation of offenders as useful and self-reliant members of society without subjecting them to the deleterious effects of jail life is what is sought to be subserved.”
Sr. Advocate V.R. Bajwa represented the appellant, while PP Babulal Nasuna appeared for the respondent.
The Court explained that the Act dealt with the powers of a Court to release certain offenders for good conduct. Section 4 of the Act does not state that the benefit of probation cannot be allowed to an accused who is above 21 years of age.
The Court remarked that “the main object of sentencing a convicted person is to bring in him certain character reformation and to keep him away from the society so as to see that the impact of his criminal character does not put any adverse impact on any other person.”
The Court took into consideration the legislative intent of the Act and extended the benefit of probation to the appellants under Section 4.
Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the appeal.
Cause Title: Nawal Kishore & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan (Neutral Citation: 2024:RJ-JP:8513)
Appearance:
Appellants: Sr. Advocate V.R. Bajwa; Advocate Amar Kumar and Savita Nathawat
Respondent: PP Babulal Nasuna