Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010007822012 2025:GAU-AS:13388 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./417/2012 DILIP KONWAR @ DHARANI KONWAR S/O SRI SADA KONWAR, R/O VILL- LALMATI P.O. LALMATI, P.S. BARBARUAH, DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A K GUPTA, MR.P J SAIKIA,MR.R S MISHRA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, , Page No.# 2/7 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 18.09.2025 Heard Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State. 2. The present criminal revision petition has been instituted assailing the Judgment and Order dated 30.05.2012, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh, in Crl.A.No.2(1)/2012, dismissing the same and affirming the Judgment and Order dated 31.12.2011, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dibrugarh, in G.R. Case No.2151/2008 and thereby affirming the conviction of the appellant, herein, under Section 420 IPC. 3. The prosecution case in brief, is that on 30.10.2008, at about 5.00 p.m, the petitioner, herein, had come to the tent house of the informant by introducing himself as an employee of the Forest Department and had taken away certain utensils on rent. The said utensils, however, were not returned and the petitioner, herein, absconded. The informant latter came to know that from the other tent house also, on earlier, occasions, the petitioner, herein, had similarly taken away utensils and misappropriated them. On 25.11.2008 at around 12.00 a.m when the petitioner, herein, had come to ‘Upahar’ Tent house for Page No.# 3/7 taking utensils on rent, then he was caught and handed over to the police. The police on conclusion of the investigation of the matter laid a charge-sheet under Section 406 IPC against the petitioner, herein. Thereafter the learned Trial Court had framed a charge under Section 420 IPC against the petitioner, herein, and the same being when read over and explained to him, he pleaded not guilty, and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, a Trial ensued. 4. During the Trial, prosecution examined 6(six) witnesses and thereafter, the statement of the petitioner under Section 313 CrPC was recorded. On conclusion of the Trial, the learned Trial Court upon appreciating the evidence coming on record was pleased vide Judgment and Order dated 31.12.2011, to convict the petitioner, herein, under Section 420 IPC. On such conviction, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 1(one) year and also pay a fine of Rs.1000/-(Rupees One thousand) in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for further 1(one) more months. The petitioner being aggrieved by his conviction by the learned Trial Court assailed the same by instituting an appeal being Crl.A.No.2(1)/2012, before the Court of the Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh. 5. The Appellate Court upon appreciating the evidences coming on record as well as the conclusions drawn by the Page No.# 4/7 learned Trial Court was pleased by Judgment and Order dated 30.05.2012, to dismiss the appeal, thereby affirming the conviction of the appellant, herein, by the learned Trial Court. Being aggrieved the petitioner has instituted the present proceedings. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the materials available on record. 7. The learned Trial Court vide Judgment and Order dated 31.12.2011, upon appreciating the evidences coming on record had drawn conclusion to the effect that the petitioner, herein, with dishonest intention have induced the informant to deliver utensils etc from his tent house to him and thereby cheated the informant by not returning those articles to him and thus the petitioner was found guilty of committing an offence under Section 420 IPC. 8. This Court had examined the said conclusion drawn by the Trial Court in the light of the evidences coming on record during the Trial. This Court finds that the evidences coming on record support the conclusion of the learned Trial Court and no infirmity is found, therein. Having drawn the said conclusion, this Court would now proceed to examine the conclusions drawn by the Appellate Court vide its Judgment dated 30.05.2012. Page No.# 5/7 9. On a perusal of the conclusion drawn by the Appellate Court, this Court finds that the Appellate Court had drawn this conclusion upon a due and proper appreciation of the evidences coming on record and no infirmity is found, therein. 10. In view of the above position, this Court is of the considered view that the conviction of the petitioner, herein, under Section 420 IPC would not mandate any interference by this Court. 11. Having drawn the above conclusions, this Court finds that the offence committed by the petitioner in the matter was so committed on 30.10.2008. The petitioner was arrested on 25.11.2008. The learned Trial Court while proceeding to consider the sentencing of the petitioner, herein, had noticed the provision of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. However, considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner, herein, declined to extend the benefits under the Act of 1958, to the petitioner, herein. 12. Considering the long lapse of time occasioning after the arrest of the petitioner, which had so occasioned on 25- 11-2008, and also considering the fact that the petitioner herein, was not proceeded against, for an offence of similar nature, prior to 25-11-2008, and/or thereafter and further noticing that the petitioner has been litigating the matter for the last around 17(seventeen) years initially before the Page No.# 6/7 Trial Court, thereafter before the Appellate Court and presently before this Court in the present proceedings. This Court is of the considered view that the petitioner, herein, is to be granted the benefit under the provision of the Act of 1958. The said benefit being permissible to be granted by this Court in exercise of its revisional powers, this Court extends the benefit under the Act of 1958, to the petitioner, herein. 13. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded, hereinabove, the petitioner is given the benefit under the Act of 1958 and the sentence is modified to the effect that instead of sending the petitioner to jail, he should be given the benefit under Section 4 of the Act of Offenders Act of 1958. This Court having only modified the sentencing with regard to imprisonment of the petitioner, herein, and the fine as imposed by the learned Trial Court, not having been interfered with, the petitioner would be liable to deposit the fine amount. 14. In view of the above discussions, it is directed that the petitioner, herein, will file 2(two) sureties to the tune of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand)each, along with a personal bond before the learned Trial Court i.e. the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dibrugarh, and undertake, to the effect that the Page No.# 7/7 petitioner shall maintain peace and good behavior during the period of 1(one) year from the date of filing of the bond. The aforesaid bond be filed by the petitioner within a period of 1(one) month from today, along with the deposit of the fine amount as imposed by the learned Trial Court vide the Judgment and Order dated 31.12.2011. 15. With the above observations and directions, the present Criminal Revision Petition stands disposed of. 16. Send down the records of the case to the Trial Court along with a copy of this order for information and necessary action. JUDGE Comparing Assistant