1. The Joint Magistrate, Sermadevi, sentenced the third accused to IS months' rigorous imprisonment for the offence of robbery (Section 392, Indian Penal Code) and to six months' additional rigorous imprisonment under Section 75 as he was an old offender. This was not a legal sentence. A person convicted under Sections 392 and 75 of the Penal Code is not convicted of distinct offences within the meaning of Section 35 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The two sentences passed by the Magistrate are hereby quashed, and in lieu of them, I direct that the third accused be rigorously imprisoned for a period of two years on a single sentence under Section 392 and 75, Indian Penal Code.
3. The Magistrate further directed all the three accused to execute a bond to keep the peace for two years and on their failing to find security he referred the matter under Section 123(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the orders of the Sessions Court.
4. The provisions of Section 106, Code of Criminal Procedure, are not applicable to the circumstances of this case, as they related to cases in which persons are accused and convicted of offences involving a breach of the peace. As it appears from the District Magistrate's report that the Sessions Judge has passed no orders upon the reference and as the reference was not legally made, the order requiring the accused to give security is hereby set aside.