Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1758 of 1990 Revisionist :- Taran Singh & Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Revisionist :- G.S. Hajela,Anju Yadav,Jai Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
List revised. No one is present for revisionists.
Heard learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Perusal of office report shows that C.J.M., Lalitpur has reported that revisionist no.1 Toran Singh has died during pendency of revision, while revisionist no.2 Par Singh appeared before him and obtained bail.
In the circumstances, the revision in respect of revisionist no.1 Toran Singh stands abated.
Learned AGA submitted that the revisionists were convicted by the Magistrate vide order dated 23.6.1990 for the offence under section 353 IPC and each of them was sentenced with three months simple imprisonment and Rs.200/- fine and in case of default with additional simple imprisonment for additional period of 15 days and they were further convicted for the offence under section 26 Forest Act and each of them was sentenced with one month simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.250/- and in case of default, to undergo simple imprisonment for additional period of 15 days..
He further submitted that against the order of conviction, the accused persons have filed Criminal Appeal No.15 of 1990, which was dismissed upholding their conviction and sentence vide impugned judgment and order dated 12.10.1990.
Learned AGA submitted that the concurrent findings of fact regarding the guilt of revisionists may not be looked into or interfered with in the revision unless there is any perversity and since the above findings of court below are based on sound analysis of evidence on record, they need no interference in revision.
Upon hearing learned AGA and perusal of record, I find it correct that in absence of any perversity, the findings of fact regarding conviction may not be interfered and there is no perversity in concurrent findings of court below. However considering the fact that the incident relating to petty offence in question regarding cutting of forest trees is alleged to have taken place on 18.4.1986 about 32 years back and during pendency of revision one of the accused- revisionist has died, while the other one must have also grown quite old, I find that the ends of justice will be adequately served if the conviction is maintained and sentence is modified to period of imprisonment already undergone.
In view of discussions made above, the conviction of revisionist under sections 353 IPC and 26 Forest Act is confirmed and the sentence is modified to period of imprisonment already undergone.
The sole surviving revisionist Par Singh is on bail. He need not surrender and his bail bonds are cancelled.
The revision is disposed of accordingly. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Let the lower court record be sent back to court below forthwith along with copy of order.
Order Date :- 24.3.2018 Tamang