Skip to content


Moti Lal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 181 of 1973
Judge
Reported inAIR1979SC1690; 1980CriLJ800; (1979)4SCC343; 1979(11)LC202(SC)
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 399 and 402
AppellantMoti Lal
RespondentState of Uttar Pradesh
Excerpt:
.....he was convicted does not have life imprisonment or death sentence - held, appellant is to be released on probation in lieu of two sureties of rs 5000 each. - [j.l. kapur,; m. hidayatullah and; s.k. dass, jj.] n, a coparcener of the hindu undivided family of g, carrying on business in kathiwar, then outside british india, entered into a partnership with strangers in bombay in 1944. a total sum of rs. 1,,50,000 was remitted to n from the undivided family funds and utilised as capital in the partnership business. n's brother joined the partnership in bombay. the partnership started another firm in banaras and a third brother of n joined the firm. for the year of assessment 1945-46 the income-tax officer held that the hindu undivided family of g was resident in the taxable..........appeal by special leave is confirmed only to the question whether or not the appellant should be released on probation under the u.p. first offenders act, it appears that the appellant was a young man and a student and there is no evidence to show that he had any previous conviction to his credit. in the facts and circumstances of the case we feel that if the appellant is sent to jail the prospect of his becoming a hardened criminal in the company of other criminals cannot be ruled out. it is also clear that the offence under section 399/402 ipc of which the appellant has been convicted is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. in these circumstances, we are satisfied that this is a fit case in which the appellant should be released on probation. we accordingly allow this.....
Judgment:

S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.

1. This appeal by special leave is confirmed only to the question whether or not the appellant should be released on probation under the U.P. First Offenders Act, It appears that the appellant was a young man and a student and there is no evidence to show that he had any previous conviction to his credit. In the facts and circumstances of the case we feel that if the appellant is sent to Jail the prospect of his becoming a hardened criminal in the company of other criminals cannot be ruled out. It is also clear that the offence under Section 399/402 IPC of which the appellant has been convicted is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that this is a fit case in which the appellant should be released on probation. We accordingly allow this appeal and while maintaining the conviction, instead of passing the sentence of imprisonment which we set aside, we release the appellant on probation of good conduct by furnishing a bond with two sureties of Rs. 5000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court an under taking that he will maintain good behavior during the period of two years, failing which he will have to appear and receive the sentence imposed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //