Anil Das vs State Of Tripura

In connection with GR No.202/2010, an FIR was registered against the accused namely, Sri Anil Das who was subsequently charged for having committed an offence punishable under Sections 452 & 324 IPC.

The trial court convicted the accused in relation to both the offences and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years in relation to an offence under Section 452 IPC and also sentenced him to suffer R.I for a period of 1 year in relation to an offence under Section 324 IPC. The trial Court while affirming such findings, on all counts, dismissed the appeal in toto.

After the matter was argued before this Court, Mr. B.N. Majumder, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly did not press the appeal on the question of conviction.

Even otherwise, having perused the record, this Court is satisfied with the reasoning adopted in convicting the accused and the findings returned by the courts below.

However, the issue which this Court finds, the court below not to have addressed with the sensitivity with which it was required to be done, is the consideration of benefit of the provision of Section-4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. There is no reason assigned while rejecting such prayer. Record reveals that by using the expression "it is not expedient to release" the convict on probation under Section-4 of such Act, the court has turn down the prayer of the convict. But why it is not expedient? remains unexplained.

It be only observed that the Apex Court in Lakhanlal versus State of M.P., MANU/SC/0786/2019 (2 Judge Bench) has extensively dealt with the issue of applicability and grant of benefit of the Act.

Also whether the accused would be entitled to the benefit of Section 360 of Cr.P.C or not, in view of Section 361 was required to be considered which has not been so done in the instant case.

As such, as mutually prayed for, on a limited ground, matter is remanded back to the trial court for consideration of the petitioner‟s case, afresh, only with regard to consideration of applicability and benefit to be granted, if any, under the provision of the Probation of Offenders Act as also Section 360 Cr.P.C.

It stands clarified that this Court has not interfered with the quantum of sentence imposed by the court below and the matter is remanded back, on a limited point, as to whether the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of provision of the Probation of the Offenders Act or not. If eventually court comes to the conclusion that petitioner not entitled to the same then he shall suffer the sentence as already imposed by the courts below.

As such, judgment passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Belonia in Case No.GR 202 of 2010 dated 09-12-2014 titled as State of Tripura versus Anil Das as affirmed by the Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in Case No. Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2015, dated 05-10-2015, impugned herein, titled as Sri Anil Das versus the State of Tripura is interfered only to a limited extent with the aforesaid observations.

Parties undertake to appear before the trial Court on 26th September, 2019.

Registrar(Judicial) to ensure that record is sent back to the trial court „forthwith' along with copy of the order.

The petition is disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.