VIKRAMADITYA PRASAD,J. - (1.) WHEN this revision application was taken up, no body appears from the side of the respondent Nos. 6 and 7, though office notes dated 8 -4 -1997 shows that notice had been validly served upon them and the daily cause list also shows the name of Mr. S.N. Sinha as the Advocate for them. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, in the absence of the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 6 and 7, this revision is being heard.
(2.) LOWER Court records have been received and perused, Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner -revisionist and no body appears from the side of the State. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 27 -9 -1996 passed in G.R. Case No. 301/1985/T.R. 474/1996 by Shri Arvind Azad, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Lohardaga, whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate hold accused Irshad Ansari guilty of an offence under Section 325 IPC and accused Rajamat Ansari guilty of an offence under Section 324 IPC and convicted them for these offences respectively and at the same time, convicted Khurshid Ansari, Shamsuddin Ansari @ Shamsul, Ram Sundar Oraon and Shyam Sundar Oraon under Section 323/34 I.P.C. It appears from perusal of the impugned judgment and lower Court record that on the same day, when he passed the order of conviction, the learned Magistrate heard the convicts on the point of sentence, He released (a) Shamsuddin Ansari @ Shamsul, Ram Sundar Oraon and Shyam Sundar Oraon under Section 360(3) Cr. P.C. on admonition, considering their age and antecedent, (b) he found that Khurshid Ansari was previously convicted in G.R. Case No. 167/84 and in that case, he was released under Section 360(1) Cr. P.C., considering his age on the date of occurrence and the circumstances in which the offence was committed and released him on probation on entering bond of Rs. 2000/ - with two Sureties for keeping peace and good behaviour for a period of one year and (c) he found that Rojmat Ansari and Irshad Ansari, who were also previously convicted in the same case, i.e. G.R. Case No. 167/84, and released on admonition, and directed their release on probation on entering bond of Rs. 3000/ - and 5000/ - respectively with two sureties for keeping peace and good behaviour for a period of two and three years respectively with a direction to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such respective period.
(3.) THE informant -revisionist had challenged the order of sentence awarded by the learned Magistrate on the ground that in the face of the admitted earlier conviction, the benefit under Section 360(3) Cr. P.C. could not have been extended to irshad Ansari and Khurshid Ansari.;