Supreme Court of India

JAWALA RAM AND ANR.versusSTATE OF H.P.

Citation: 1995 INSC 506
Decided: 28 August 1995
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Bench: K RAMASWAMYB L HANSARIA

Holding

The appeal is allowed; the appellants are placed on probation for one year under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, subject to maintaining good conduct.

Summary

The appellants were convicted under IPC sections 451, 426 read with 34 and sentenced to two months' imprisonment. The Himachal Pradesh High Court postponed the sentence under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, on the condition that the appellants file an undertaking of good conduct, which they failed to do, leading to dismissal of their appeal. The appellants then filed an explanation and an affidavit undertaking good conduct before the Supreme Court, citing non‑receipt of the advocate's letter. The Supreme Court accepted the explanation and the undertaking, ordered that the appellants remain on probation for one year, and held that if they maintain good conduct they will be deemed to have served the sentence, otherwise they may be taken into custody. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal.

Issues considered

Whether the Supreme Court can accept a post‑dismissal undertaking of good conduct and grant probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 34, s. 426, s. 451
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958s. 4

Subjects

ProbationSection 4Good conduct undertakingCriminal appealSentencingSupreme Court

Judgment

                                JAWALA RAM AND ANR.                                    A
                                               v.
                                       STATE OF H.P.

                                      AUGUST 28, 1995

                     (K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.]                             B

                Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 : Section 4.

                Probation-Benefit of-Failure to file underlaking for-Dismissal of
          appeal-Filing of explanation and unde1taking before Supreme Cowt-Accep-      C
          tance and Directions.

               The appellants were held entitled to benefit of Section 4 of the
          Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 by the High Court but their appeal was
          dismissed for not filing the undertaking of good conduct. They filed their
          explanation as well as the undertaking before this Court.                    D
                Accepting the same, this Court

                HELD : The appellant shall remain on probation for a period of one
          year from the date of this order. If they keep good conduct and behaviour
          during this period, they shall be deemed to have served the sentence. In     E
          case they do not, the authorities would be free to take them into custody
          to serve the sentence imposed on them. (116-D]

                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION                   Criminal Appeal
          Nos. 1000-1001 of 1995.
                                                                                       F
               From the Judgment and Order dated 21.4.95 of the Himachal
          Pradesh High Court in Crl. A. No. 329 of 1989.

                Krishan Mahajan, R.N. Karanjawala and Mrs. Manik Karanjawala,
          for the Appellants.                                                          G
...
               The following Order of the Court was delivered :
      )
                As directed by the Court, the Registry issued notice to the standing
          counsel for the state of Himachal Pradesh, but no appearance has been
          entered so far. Nobody has appeared also.                                    H
                                             115
    116                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A         Leave Granted.

          The appellants have been convicted under ss.451, 426 read with s.34
    of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo two m0nths imprison-
    ment. The High Court postponed the sentence under s.4 of Probation of
    Offender's Act subject to filing an undertaking of good conduct. Since the
B   appellants had not executed the under taking, the High Court dismissed
    the appeal. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

           In view of the finding of the High Court that the appellants are
    entitled to Probation of Offender's Act and were directed to execute a
    bond, and in view of the explanation given by the appellants in the form of
c   an affidavit filed. in this Court, we accept the explanation of non-receipt of
    the advocate's letter. They have also filed an affidavit in this Court giving ·
    an undertaking that they would keep good conduct for a period of one
    year. We accept the undertaking and state that they shall remain on
    probation for a period of one year from today. If they keep good conduct
D   and behaviour during this period, they shall be deemed to have served the
    sentence. In case they do not, the authorities would be free to take them
    into custody to serve the sentence imposed by the trial court and affirmed
    by the High Court.

          The appeal is accordingly allowed.

    T.N.A.                                                      Appeal allowed.

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "Probation"Sign in to search