Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a person convicted under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 could be granted probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 or the corresponding provisions of criminal procedure law after insertion of Section 140-A of the Customs Act, 1962.
Analysis: Section 140-A expressly provided that nothing contained in Section 562 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, or in the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, would apply to a person convicted of an offence under the Customs Act unless such person was under eighteen years of age. The provision had already come into force when the respondent was convicted, and the offence and conviction occurred after its commencement. The statutory bar therefore made the grant of probation impermissible. The plea for leniency on account of delay, family circumstances, and the probation officer's report was rejected, as none of those considerations could override the legislative mandate.
Conclusion: The grant of probation was unsustainable in law and the respondent was not entitled to the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
Final Conclusion: The appellate court set aside the probation order and restored the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the Customs Act expressly excludes the application of probationary relief to convicted offenders above eighteen years of age, a court cannot extend probation under the Probation of Offenders Act or related criminal procedure provisions.