Hrishikesh Roy JUDGMENT
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.
1. The Appellants were youngsters aged 20 and 19 years when they fell foul of the law. On 14.02.2003, at around 7.30 p.m., the Appellants alongwith co-Accused Gurpreet Singh1 approached the complainant-PW1 to hire a taxi to go to a village. En route, when at their behest the car was stopped, Gurpreet Singh caught hold of the complainant and the Appellant Jagdeep Singh took a dagger and inflicted 6-7 injuries on PW1's forehead. Appellant Lakhvir Singh inflicted 2-3 injuries on his abdomen and 1 injury on his neck using a knife. The complainant was thrown out of his taxi and the three people fled with the taxi. In pursuance to the reporting of the crime by complainant, an FIR was registered on 15.02.2003 Under Section 382 and Section 307 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code. Knife and dagger were recovered alongwith the taxi and the trial Court framed charges Under Section 397 Indian Penal Code. Post trial, the Appellants were convicted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 8.1.2005 and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 7 years each.
2. The appeal preferred by the Appellants has been dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 24.10.2019.
3. The Appellants approached this Court by a special leave petition. Annexed thereto, the compromise deed arrived at between the complainant Amrik Singh and the Appellants before us, in terms whereof the complainant has stated that he did not want to pursue any action against the Appellants and has no objection to their release on bail or acquittal. The Appellants have already served about 50% of their sentence while in custody.
4. On 3.12.2020, this Court while recording the aforesaid plea, issued notice on the SLP and on the prayer for interim relief of bail while simultaneously impleading the complainant as the 2nd Respondent. On 18.12.2020, counsel for the State and Respondent No. 2 entered appearance and counsel for Respondent No. 2 confirmed that the dispute had been amicably resolved. However, counsel for Respondent No. 1 submitted that the minimum sentence provided by the statute Under Section 397 is 7 years and the same cannot be reduced below that period. On this submission, learned Counsel for the Appellants sought benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. It is on the limited conspectus of the aforesaid aspect that on 11.01.2021, we granted leave and reserved the judgment upon conclusion of arguments and the parties having filed their respective synopsis.
The legal position
5. The plea of the learned Counsel for the State Respondent No. 1 is based on the judgment of this Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Vikram Das MANU/SC/0159/2019 : (2019) 4 SCC 125 opining that the courts cannot im........