Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 985 (HP)

P. N. Khamboj v. State of H. P.

2018-05-24

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2018
JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged partially the judgment dated 23.10.2010, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla in Criminal Appeal No. 47-S/10 of 08, vide which learned Appellate Court while upholding the conviction imposed upon the respondent-accused by the learned Trial Court for having committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, ordered the release of the respondent-accused after admonition by giving him the benefit of Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act. While releasing the respondent after admonition, by giving him the benefit of Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, directions were passed by the learned Appellate Court as to within what period amount of compensation had to be deposited by the respondent-accused. As of now, there is nothing on record to suggest that the said directions passed by the learned Appellate Court was not complied with. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the judgments passed by learned Courts below. 3. Having perused the impugned judgment, in my considered view, there is no infirmity in the same. The benefit of Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act has been granted by the learned Appellate Court in favour of the respondent-accused after assigning reasons. Even otherwise, whether or not benefit of Probation of Offenders Act has to be extended to an accused is the prerogative of the Court, which prerogative has to be exercised by the Court prudently after applying its mind on the facts of the case. Learned Appellate Court has done exactly the same while extending the benefit of Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act in favour of the respondent-accused, as reasons have been mentioned in the order for granting benefit to the convict. Therefore, as the judgment dated 23.10.2010, passed by the learned Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No. 47-S/10 of 08 does not suffers from any infirmity, in my considered view, there is no occasion to interfere with the same. Accordingly, as there is no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.