S.S.GREWAL, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, dated 9.3,1990 whereby order of conviction under section 379 IPC and sentence of six months RI and fine of Rs 500/- or in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for three months, was maintained. Notice in this Revision Petition was only sent to the State concerning quantum of sentence to be awarded to the petitioner.
(2.) IN brief, facts relevant for the disposal of this case are that on 20-7-1985 Mahashu complainant resident of village Phangota nude a statement in Police Station, Dhar Kalan on the basis of which FIR No. 12 under Section 379 IPC was recorded. As per allegations in the FIR the petitioner, his co-accused Kewal Singh and Kuldip Singh cut and removed 8 mango trees belonging to Zila Parishad growing along the pucca road leading from village Bhatwan to village Darkua, about 25 days prior to the registration of the said case. Apart from the aforesaid three persons, Kam Singh and Darshan Kumar were also challaned for committing offence under section 379 IPC. The learned trial Court only convicted the present petitioner on the basis of two receipts Exs. PW5/A and Ex. PW5/B dated 14-7-1985 as the petitioner had executed these two receipts after receiving a sum of Rs. 4100/- in all, from Shri M.L. Sharma of Bajri Company, Pathankot to whom the mango trees are alleged to have been sold. There is no evidence on the record of the lower Courts that the petitioner is a previous convict. Taking into consideration the over-all circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner has been undergoing agony of trial for the last 5 years, he is directed to be released on probation for a period of one year under section 4 (3) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The petitioner shall keep peace and be of good behaviour during the said period and shall further undertake to appear in the Court as and when called upon to receive the sentence. During the period of probation, the petitioner shall remain under supervision of District Probation Officer, Gurdaspur who shall send periodic reports concerning the conduct of the petitioner to the Sessions Judge and in case his conduct is not found satisfactory the Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur shall report the matter to this Court for appropriate action. The petitioner shall appear before the District Probation Officer on 23-4-1990. The sentence of fine imposed by the trial Court is also set aside in view of the authority in case Ishar Dass v. State, AIR 1972 SC 1295. The petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 500/- as costs. Fine, if already paid, shall be set off towards the payment of costs.
(3.) EXCEPT with these modifications, I do not find any merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.;