Supreme Court Grants Benefit of Probation to Appellant Convicted under Karnataka Police Act

Court considers appellant's conduct and lack of subsequent offenses, allows appeal for probation

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India granted the benefit of probation to an appellant who was convicted under Section 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The appellant, Soori @ T.V. Suresh, had filed an appeal seeking probation after being found guilty of gambling.

The case stemmed from an FIR registered in 2007 against 24 accused individuals, including the appellant, for indulging in gambling activities. The Trial Court had initially sentenced them to one year of imprisonment and imposed a fine. However, the accused filed affidavits undertaking not to commit such offenses again, leading the Trial Court to modify the sentence to imprisonment until the rising of the Court.

On appeal, the Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal against the appellant, sentencing him to one month of imprisonment and a fine under Section 80 of the 1963 Act. The appellant was acquitted of the offense under Section 79. The High Court subsequently dismissed the appeal against the order of the first Appellate Court.

During the Supreme Court proceedings, the appellant's counsel argued that the appellant was not a habitual offender and had not engaged in any gambling activities since the incident. They requested the benefit of probation. The State, however, contended that the seriousness of the offense and the appellant's involvement in cases under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) disqualified him from receiving probation.

Considering the appellant's age at the time of the incident, around 31 years, and the absence of subsequent gambling offenses, the Supreme Court held that the appellant deserved the benefit of probation. The Court emphasized that the incident had occurred in 2007, and the appellant had exhibited no further involvement in gambling cases. Consequently, the Court directed the appellant's release on probation under Section 360 of the CrPC. To ensure good behavior and maintenance of peace during the sentence's duration, the appellant was required to enter into a bond with two sureties. Failure to comply with the conditions would result in serving the original sentence.

D.D-15.May.2023

Soori @ T.V. Suresh vs The State of Karnataka