Court No. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1070 of 1989 Revisionist :- Hakim Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P...
Counsel for Revisionist :- R.K. Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A..
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
The Criminal Revision has been filed against the order and judgment dated 12.7.1989 passed by Xth Additional Sessions Judge, Agra in criminal appeal no. 206 of 1987 dismissing the appeal filed by the applicants against the judgment and order dated 10.12.1987 passed by IInd Additional Munsif Magistrate Agra in Criminal Case No. 274 of 1987 convicting and sentencing applicants under Sections 147 I.P.C. to six moths R.I. under Section 323/ 149 I.P.C. to six months R.I. under Section 324/149 to six months R.I. and further convicting and sentencing applicants under Section 148 to 6 months R.I.
Heard Mahish Kumar Kuntal, learned counsel for the revisionists, Sri Piyush Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the opposite party-State and perused the record.
By the previous order of this Court this revision has been abated against revisionist nos. 1 and 2. Therefore the order passed today is related to revisionist no. 3 and 4 namely, Ramveer and Jang Jeet.
Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that matter is very old and he prays only with regard to the sentence. He further submitted that there is no serious injury. The revisionists has filed this revision against the impugned order passed by the court below in the year 1989 which has been heard today after laps of more than 30 years, hence in these circumstances, this Hon'ble Court may take lenient view and graciously modify the sentence awarded to them for the period undergone alongwith fine.
Considering the law laid down by Apex Court in Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad Versus State of Maharashtra (arising out of S.L.P. (CRl.) No. 6287 of 2011), this Hon'ble court may take a view of leniency and graciously modified the sentence awarded to revisionists to the period already undergone alongwith fine. In case this Hon'ble Court finds it desirable to enhance the fine, the revisionists will not treat the same as enhancement of sentence.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case alongwith case law cited above, I am of the view that sentence part of the impugned order dated 12.07.1989 is desired to be modified suitably. However, there are 2 living revisionists and for the reasons stated above, sentence part of the impugned orders is modified to the extent that the revisionists are sentenced for the period of sentence undergone and compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to the injured persons in which revisionist no. 3 will pay Rs. 5,000/- and Revisionist no. 4 will pay Rs. 5,000/- to injured namely, Sobhran and Jadveer or to both legal heirs and representatives of the both injured in case the injured had died under Section 357 Cr.P.C.
In case of failure to deposit the fine as directed above, they will serve out the remainder of sentence.
A copy of this order be communicated to the trial concerned for necessary compliance.
The revision is disposed of to the aforesaid extent..
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 A. Pt. Singh