Court No. - 61
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2158 of 2010 Appellant :- Lala Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manvendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rang Nath Pandey,J.
The instant appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 23.02.2010 passed by Additional Session Judge, Fast Track Court No. 4, Fatehpur in Sessions Trial No. 802 of 2006 arising out of crime No. 191 of 2006 under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Kotwali, District Fatehpur, whereby the appellant had been convicted and sentenced as under:-
i) Under section 307/34 I.P.C. - Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of seven years rigorous imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 2,000/- with default stipulation.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
Learned counsel for the appellant has stated at the bar that the appellant in custody for the period of sixteen months. Learned counsel has further submitted that he has to say nothing on merits of the case and he simply prays that the custodial punishment awarded to the appellant be reduced to the period already undergone in jail and some fine may be imposed. He points out that the incident had taken place in the year of 2006.
So far as, sentence is concerned it has been held that:-
(i) In Uthem Rajanna vs. State of A. P. reported in 2005 (11) Supreme Court Cases 531; accused was convicted and sentenced for six months under Section 304-A IPC alongwith fine, three months under Section 338 IPC. In appeal Hon'ble the Apex Court has reduced the sentence period already undergone.
(ii) In Neelam Bahal and another vs. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2010) 2 Supreme Court Cases 229; accused was convicted and sentenced under Section 307 IPC and sentenced him to undergo seven years' rigorous imprisonment. Hon'ble the Apex Court has convicted accused under Section 326 IPC and reduced the sentence to period already undergone i.e. almost one year on the ground that the incident happened in the year 1987 when the accused was of young age of 25 years.
After perusing the judgment impugned and considering the above mentioned judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, I am of the view that the ends of justice will be met if the custodial punishment awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him in jail and a reasonable amount of fine is imposed upon him.
In the circumstances mentioned above, modifying the period of custodial sentence, it is directed that the appellant is sentenced to undergo imprisonment already undergone by him in jail. Besides, he is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, out of which, Rs. 5,000/- shall be deposited to the family of the injured and remaining Rs. 5,000/- shall be deposited in the favour of State of U.P. The appellant is directed to deposit the entire fine within a period of one month from today in the court concerned.
Thus, the appeal is partly allowed with modification on the point of sentence only as mentioned above. Conviction is maintained.
Let a copy of the judgment be sent to the concerned learned Sessions Judge concerned for its onward transmission to the court concerned for information and further action in the matter.
Order Date :- 29.3.2018 Ashish