JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The respondent was convicted for offences punishable under
Section 135 (b) of the Customs Act and Section 8(l)(ii) read with Section 85(ii) of the
Gold Control Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of one year on each count with a direction
for running of the two sentences concurrently by the IVth City Magistrate, Hyderabad.
On appeal by tbe respondents tbe Chief City Magistrate confirmed the convictions, but
instead of sentencing him to any
punishment released him on probation of good conduct applying the
provisions of Sec.4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, This revision
is filed by tbe State assailing the order of the Chief City Magistrate
releasing the respondent on probation of good conduct.
(2.) The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that(1) the respondent
is not entitled to the benefits of the provisions of Probation of
Offenders Act in so far as the offence committed by the respondent
under the Gold Control Act is concerned the Legislature has prescribed
a minimum punishment of six months imprisonment as provided under
Section 85 of the Act. (2) In any case having regard to the circumstances
of the case and the nature of the offences it is not expedient to
release the respondent on probation of good conduct instead of senfencing
him to punishment.
(3.) For the first point, the learned public Prosecutor has placed
reliance on a decision of the Mysore High Court in Assistant Collector
of Central Excise v, Anant P, Oza In that case the accused was
found in possession of 59 pellets of gold with foreign markings and he
was convicted under Rule 126 P(2)(ii) of the Defence of India Rules
and under Section 135 b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Before the Mysore High
Court it was contended that it is a fit case for the court to
act under tbe Probation of Offenders Act and release the accused under
those provisions. The court refused to apply the provisions of the
Probation of Offenders Act on two grounds, viz (1) that under the
provisions of Rule 126 P(2)(ii) of the Defence of India Rules tbe court
has no option but to impose imprisonment for a term of not less, than
six months and therefore it is obligatory on the part of the court to
sentence the accused to the minimum term of imprisonment and he
cannot be released on probation of good conduct without sentencing
him to that minimum term of imprisonment and (2) it is not desirable
to apply the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act to the smugglers of gold as
smuggling of gold is an anti-social act affecting the
very economy of the country.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.