In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 Date of Decision:February 18, 2009 Sham Lal and others ---Petitioners versus State of U.T. Chandigarh ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. J.P.Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Mohan Jain, Senior Advocate and Mr.S.K.Chopra ,Advocate, for the petitioner No. 1 Mr. N.K.Sanghi, Advocate, for petitioner No. 2. None for the respondent. *** SABINA, J. Petitioners were convicted for an offence under Section 147, 435 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') vide judgment dated 21.4.1998 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh. Vide order dated 22.4.1998, petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 435 read with Section 149 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh vide judgment dated 17.7.2001. Hence, the present revision petition. Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -2- Prosecution story, in brief, as noticed by the learned Appellate Court in paras 2 of its judgment, is as under:- “The facts of the case are encapsulated like this. Station house Officer of Police station, Central, Chandigarh presented the challan against the appellants (accused in the trial court) for the ofrfences under Sections 147, 427, 435 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The facts of the case of the prosecution are that on 21.9.1990, ASI Sat Pal accompanied by other police officials was present at the market of Sector 18-C, Chandigarh on account of deployment on agitation duty. A wireless message was received by him that the students numbering 250 to 300 were setting the vehicles on fire which were parked in the boundary of Hydel Bhawan in Sector 18-B, Chandigarh. ASI Sat Pal along with other police officials rushed to the above referred place and found that mob of 250 to 300 students were setting the vehicles on fire and thereby damaging them, which were parked in the said building. The agitationists took to their heels on seeing ASI Sat Pal and other police officials there at. ASI Sat Pal recorded numbers of some of the vehicles, which were affected by this arson indulged in by the students. ASI Sat Pal summoned the fire Brigade to extinguish the fire. At that time, he received a wireless message that some students who were agitating against the reservation policy set on Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -3- fire some vehicles parked in Kothi No. 1308, Sector 18-D Chandigarh. The agitationists set on fire other vehicles. ASI Sat Pal dispatched ruqa to the police station and himself went to the respective affected places, where the agisationists had set the vehicles on fire and damaged them. He took into police possession burnt and damaged vehicles vide recovery memos and also prepared the rough site plans thereof. He took into police possession the vehicles, which were set on fire by the agitationists at Hydel Bhawan, Sector 18-B Chandigarh. A wireless message was again received by him that one Tractor had been set on fire by the agitationists in Sector-21, Chandigarh. ASI Sat Pal, thereafter, reached at Sector -21 and found that mob consisting of 150 to 200 agitators had set a Tractor on fire. They tried to run away on seeing them and the above ASI managed to apprehend 10 agitators out of them. He took into police possession Tractor No. CHW 5862, which was set on fire, vide separate memo. He prepared the rough site plan thereof and recorded the statements of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. The entire vehicles put on fire by the agitationists were taken into police possession vide separate memos by ASI Sat Pal. On completion of the investigation of the case, the challan was presented against the accused in the trial court.” Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -4- Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that petitioners were not previous convicts. The incident in this case relates to the year 1990 and the petitioners were facing criminal proceedings since then. Some of the persons who were also part of the mob, had been sentenced to pay fine only. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not challenged the conviction of the petitioners as ordered by the courts below but has submitted that the petitioners be released on probation. The object of releasing the accused on probation is that he should be given an opportunity to reform himself. The benefit of probation can be denied only to hardened criminals or where restrictions have been imposed by Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Offences under Sections 435 and 147 IPC are bailable. In the present case occurrence had taken place on 21.9.1990 at about 2-00 p.m. Petitioners are facing criminal proceedings since then. Petitioners were convicted for an offence under sections 147, 435 read with Section 149 IPC, Petitioners are not previous convicts and have got families to support. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioners, as ordered by the courts below, is maintained. However, the sentence awarded to the petitioners by the courts below is set aside. Instead of sentencing the petitioners to imprisonment they be released on probation for one year subject to their furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount within two months from today to the satisfaction of the trial/Duty Magistrate. Petitioners shall further undertake to appear and receive sentence as and when they are called upon during the period of probation and in the meantime, they should keep peace and be of good Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -5- behavior. The fine imposed on the petitioner be treated as costs of proceedings. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) JUDGE February 18, 2009 PARAMJIT