State Of Delhi v. Ajay

$~7 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.A. 1137/2014, Crl MA 13084/2014 STATE OF DELHI ..... Appellant Through Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State SI Ravinder Hooda, PS Palam Village versus AJAY ..... Respondent Through Respondent in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 13.10.2017 Trial Court has convicted the respondent under Section 308 IPC vide judgment dated 22nd April, 2014 and vide order on sentence dated 30th April, 2014 has ordered for release on probation for two years subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety bond in sum of `20,000/- each with direction to keep good behaviour and maintain peace in the society.

Aggrieved with the order of release of respondent on probation passed by the Trial Court, appellant has filed the present appeal. Trial Court gave the benefit of benevolent provision of probation under the law i.e. Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Reliance has been placed on Hari Singh vs. Sukhbir Singh, AIR 1988 (SC) 2127, Sanjay vs. State 114 (2004) DLT LAW 749 (Delhi), Md. Moni Alam vs. State of Bihar AIR (2010) (SC) 698 and Mohd.

Monir Alam vs. State of Rajasthan AIR 2010 (SC) 698. Trial Court has noted that the appellant was aged 23 years of age and was the only bread earner in the family. He was not involved in any other case.

I find no illegality, perversity or irregularity in the impugned order on sentence.

For the foregoing reasons, appeal is dismissed. Miscellaneous application is disposed of as infructuous.

A.K. PATHAK, J OCTOBER 13, 2017 sm