DIPAK MISRA,J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Respondent Nos. 2 to 10 were prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short, 'the 1961 Act'). The respondent Nos.2 and 3 were convicted under Section 498-A IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each with the default clause. The other accused, i.e., respondent nos.4 to 10 were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each with the default clause. All the accused persons were convicted under Section 323 of the IPC and Section 4 of the 1961 Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months on the first count and for a period of one year on the second score. They were also sentenced to pay fine with the stipulation of the default clause.
(3.) The respondents challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence before the learned Sessions Judge, Unnao, U.P. in Criminal Appeal No.55 of 2013 who, in course of hearing, taking note of the fact that the counsel appearing for the appellants had abandoned the challenge pertaining to the conviction but only confined the argument seeking benefit under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (for short, 'the PO Act'), extended the benefit as prayed for.;