HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3379 of 2004 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J. 1. Heard Sri Shashwat Kishore Chaturvedi, learned counsel for appellants; Sri Rahul Asthana, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent and perused the record. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party, even in the revised call. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred by appellant challenging the judgment and order dated 27.5.2004 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, F.T.C. No.2, Basti in Session Trial No.290 of 2002 (State vs. Chandra Prakash & others) arising out of Case Crime No.262 of 2001, Police Station Bakhira, District Sant Kabir Nagar convicting and sentencing the appellants under Sections 323/34 I.P.C. to undergo one year imprisonment and under Section 325/34 to undergo Two years simple imprisonment, but in place of imprisonment the appellants were released on probation with a condition to keep good character for period of next two years and further to deposit two sureties of Rs.10,000/- and personal bond of the same amount. 3. Learned counsel for appellants have made no argument on the point of conviction and submitted that appellants have been released on probation under Section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and they have followed the conditions as stipulated in the judgement and order dated 27.5.2004. He submitted that due to order of probation, future of appellants may not be affected. Hence this appeal. 4. Learned AGA opposed the contention made by learned counsel for appellant. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : S.K. Chaturvedi, Shashwat Kishore Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Govt. Advocate, Ram Pravesh Yadav Chandra Prakash And Others .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. .....Respondent(s) 5. The prosecution witnesses have fully supported the prosecution story in their statements given before the trial Court. 6. In this context Section 12 of The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 is reproduced:- "12. Removal of disqualification attaching to conviction.-- Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, a person found guilty of an offence and dealt with under the provisions of section 3 or section 4 shall not suffer disqualification, if any, attaching to a conviction of an offence under such law: Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to a person who, after his release under section 4 is subsequently sentenced for the original offence." 7. Interpretation of Section 12 of The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 will depend upon observation given by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway & another vs. T.R.Challapan, AIR 1975 SC 2216 and by Delhi High Court in the case of Iqbal Singh vs. Inspector General of Police and others, AIR 1970 Delhi, 240. 8. Appellants were convicted under Sections 323/34 and 325/34 I.P.C. by the Court concerned and maximum lenient view was taken by the trial Court. Two years of probation have elapsed from the date of judgment. No fruitful purpose would serve in keeping this appeal pending. The view taken by the trial Court is plausible view. No interference is called for. The judgement and order dated 27.5.2024 passed by the trial Court is hereby confirmed. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed. 9. Office is directed to transmit copy of this order alongwith record of trial Court to the trial Court. April 30, 2026 Dev CRLA No. 3379 of 2004 2 (Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad