1999 JTR(SC) 1117
2000 10 SCC 260 ; 2000 SCC(Cri) 1244 ; 2000 KHC 4264 ; 2000 1 KLT(Online) 971
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.T.Thomas : M.B.Shah
Bore Gowda
Versus
State Of Karnataka
Case No. : 1009 , 1011 of 1999
Date of Decision : 9/27/99
The court held that the benevolent provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act can be extended to a convict where the offense is old, the amount involved is small, and the loss has been fully replenished with interest.
Act
Referred
:INDIAN PENAL CODE
: S.408
PROBATION OF OFFENDERS ACT: S.4
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 408 - Probation of Offenders Act - Conviction for criminal breach of trust by a secretary of a cooperative society - Sentence of one month rigorous imprisonment - Irregularities pertaining to small amounts occurred in 1981-82 - Entire amount replenished with interest, resulting in no loss to the society - Benevolent provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act can be extended to the appellant in view of the nature of the offense, the time elapsed, and the restitution made. (Paras 2, 3)
Facts of the case:
The appellant, who served as the Secretary of a cooperative society, was convicted under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code following an audit report that detected irregularities in the year 1981-82. The amounts involved were small, specifically Rs. 1812 and below. Upon the irregularities being pointed out, the appellant replenished the full amount along with interest, ensuring the society suffered no financial loss.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that the irregularities occurred several years prior and involved minimal sums which had been fully repaid. Consequently, the appellant was eligible for the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Issues: Whether the appellant, convicted of criminal breach of trust for small amounts that were subsequently repaid, should be granted the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Ratio Decidendi: In cases where the offense occurred long ago, the amount involved is small, and the loss has been fully replenished with interest, the court may exercise its discretion to apply the benevolent provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act to release the convict on a bond of good behavior.
Result: Appeals disposed of; sentence suspended sine die; appellant released on executing a bond for keeping peace and good behaviour for 3 years.
Facts of the case:
The appellant, who served as the Secretary of a cooperative society, was convicted under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code following an audit report that detected irregularities in the year 1981-82. The amounts involved were small, specifically Rs. 1812 and below. Upon the irregularities being pointed out, the appellant replenished the full amount along with interest, ensuring the society suffered no financial loss.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that the irregularities occurred several years prior and involved minimal sums which had been fully repaid. Consequently, the appellant was eligible for the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Issues: Whether the appellant, convicted of criminal breach of trust for small amounts that were subsequently repaid, should be granted the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Ratio Decidendi: In cases where the offense occurred long ago, the amount involved is small, and the loss has been fully replenished with interest, the court may exercise its discretion to apply the benevolent provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act to release the convict on a bond of good behavior.
Result: Appeals disposed of; sentence suspended sine die; appellant released on executing a bond for keeping peace and good behaviour for 3 years.
K.T.THOMAS, J.
(1) LEAVE granted.
(2) THESE are cases where the appellant was convicted under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code and his sentence has been reduced to rigorous imprisonment for one month. He was Secretary of a cooperative society. During audit report some irregularities had been detected on the basis of which he was prosecuted. The irregularities happened in the year 1981-82. The 3 instances for which the present cases have been registered and charge- sheeted pertain to small amounts like Rs.1812 and below. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as soon as the irregularities had been pointed out the appellant had replenished the entire amount together with interest which means the Society had not been put to a loss.
(3) IN view of the aforesaid circumstances and also the fact that it happened in the year 1981-82 we are of the view that the benevolent provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act can be extended to this appellant. We, therefore, order that the appellant instead of undergoing the sentence be released on his executing a bond before the trial court for keeping peace and be of good behaviour for a period of 3 years. The bond shall be supported by two solvent sureties for a sum of Rs.3000. The sentence will hence stand suspended sine die.
(4) THE appeals are disposed of accordingly.