KAMLESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
            CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 372 CR.P.C. No. - 247 of 2023

Kamlesh
                                                           .....Appellant(s)
                                  Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others
                                                         .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)       : Anand Prakash Srivastava, Bipin Lal
                                 Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s)      : G.A., Syed Nadeem Ahmad

Court No. - 93
            HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri
Rahul Ashtana, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present appeal has been preferred by complainant assailing the
judgment and order dated 26.02.2022 passed by Additional Sessions
Judge, Court No.3, District- Ballia in Sessions Trial No. 178 of 2013,
State Vs. Lalu and another, arising out of Case Crime No.247A of 2001,
under Section 323, 504 I.P.C. Police Station- Rasara, District- Ballia,
whereby the appellants Lalu and Punjabi have been convicted for offences
under Sections 323 I.P.C., however, instead of awarding substantive
sentence the trial court considering the provisions of Section 360 Cr.P.C.,
and extended the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, has released the
accused persons on probation of good conduct for a period of one year.

3. The trial court acquitted the respondents for the charge under Section
504 I.P.C. holding that the essential ingredients of the said offence were
not made out from the evidence on record.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial court has erred
in granting the benefit of probation and has also wrongly acquitted the
accused persons for offences under Section 504 I.P.C.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for
the State and perused the record. This Court finds that the trial court has,
upon due appreciation of evidence on record, recorded a finding of
                                                            C372 No. 247 of 2023
                                2


conviction under Section 323 I.P.C. While considering the question of
sentence, the trial court has elaborately discussed the application of
provisions of Section 360 I.P.C. and the Probation of Offenders Act.

6. It is also noteworthy that the incident in question is about two decades
old and the trial court has taken into consideration the advanced age of the
accused persons while extending the benefit of Section 4 of Probation of
Offenders Act.

7. The trial court has exercised its discretion judiciously, taking into
account the nature of offence, attendant circumstances and absence of
criminal antecedents of the accused persons. The reasoning assigned by
the trial court does not suffer from any perversity or arbitrariness.

8. In so far as, the acquittal under Section 504 I.P.C. is concerned, the trial
court has recorded a categorical finding that the essential ingredients of
intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace have not been
established. The submissions made in the present appeal is not of such
nature as to persuade the Court to take a different view.

9. The trial court has also placed reliance upon the law laid down in
Subhash Chand & Others Vs. State Of U.P., 2016(2) ALJ 417,
wherein it has been held that ordinarily the benefit of probation should be
extended to eligible offenders and that where the provisions of probation
are applicable, the same ought to be given due effect and cannot be lightly
ignored in favour of imposing the sentence under the Indian Penal Code.

10. It is well settled that the grant of benefit under the probation laws is a
matter of judicial discretion to be exercised on sound legal principles.

11. No illegality, perversity or material irregularity has been demonstrated
in the impugned judgment so as to warrant interference by this Court at
the admission stage.

12. In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to entertain the appeal.
Accordingly the appeal is dismissed on admission stage.

.
                                                                      C372 No. 247 of 2023
                                                     3



                                                         (Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)
                                    March 16, 2026
                                    P. Pandey




Digitally signed by :-
PUSHPENDRA PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad