- (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) The application in revision has been admitted only in respect of the severity of the sentence. The accused-applicant stands convicted u/S. 353 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo two months' R. I. He is an aggrieved ex-employee of the Municipal Board. He wanted to lay his grievances when according to him the facts were being mis-represented before the Board. It, therefore, appears to me that his real intention at the time was not to use criminal force but, in fact, to lay his grievances before the Board. It has been observed in 'ANANDA PARHI V/s. EMPEROR', 32 Cri LJ 1166 (Pat) as below : "A breach of the peace, even if involving an assault on a public officer of a mild character, unless there be some elements of criminality in it, should not ordinarily be punished by sentences of imprisonment. So far as possible the jails should be kept for the reception of persons who perform criminal acts of not merely a technical but of a criminal character."
(3.) It would, in the special circumstances of the case, meet the ends of justice if the sentence of imprisonment is set aside and the accused-applicant is directed to be released on probation of good conduct for a period of six months on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 500/- with one surety in the like amount to appear and receive sentence when called upon during that period and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour as laid down u/S. 562 of the Cr. P. C.;