Partly allowed

Abdul Salam and Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2019CRLR/1675/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified the sentence for living revisionists to the period already undergone and directed them to pay Rs. 20,000 as compensation to the injured under Section 357 Cr.P.C., following the precedent of Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad, noting the death of one revisionist and the age of the case.

What did the court decide?

Sentence modified to period undergone; Rs. 20,000 compensation directed to be paid to injured, with remainder to be paid from fine in case of default.

Abdul Salam and Others Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 17.. .

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1675 of 2002

¶3

Revisionist :- Abdul Salam And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Vinod Kumar Srivastava,B. Sahai,Mukesh Kumar,Sameer Jain,Suraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

As per report of learned C.J.M. dated 8.3.2019 revisionist no. 1 Abdul Salam has died. Learned counsel for the revisionist has also filed municipal death certificate of the revisionist no. 1, Abdul Salam. Therefore, this revisions is abated against the revisionist no. 1.

¶6

The Criminal Revision has been filed against the order and judgment dated 10.10.2002 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Court No. 3), Varanasi in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2001 whereby dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and order dated 22.1.2001 passed IVth A.C.J.M., Varanasi in Criminal case no. 251 of 1997 arising out of crime no. 32/97 whereby the revisionists have been convicted under Section 452, 326, 34 I.P.C. and they were sentenced with two years R.I. and fine of Rs. 2000/- each under Section 452 I.P.C. with 5 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 10,000/- each under Section 326 read with Section 34 I.P.C. in default of payment of fine six months additional imprisonment. All the sentences will run concurrently.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. for the opposite party-State and perused the record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that matter is very old and he prays only with regard to the sentence. The revisionist has filed this revision against the impugned order passed by the court below in the year 2002 which has been heard today after laps of more than 17 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. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the revisionists that revisionists have undergone a period of 18 months in jail.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

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 10.10.2002 is desired to be modified suitably. However, there are only two 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 fine, if any, awarded by the court below and it is directed to the revisionists to pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation to the injured, Kurban Ali, which will be deposited by them in the court below within 3 months from today and it is further directed that out of compensation amount of Rs. 20,000/- revisionist no. 2, Abdul Kalam will deposit Rs. 10,000/- to the injured, Kurban Ali and revisionist no. 3 Mohd. Iqram will deposit Rs. 10,000/- to the injured, Kurban Ali and in case of death of injured, Kurban Ali it will be paid in favour of his legal representatives/heirs) under Section 357 Cr.P.C.

¶12

In case of failure to deposit the fine directed by the court below, if any, and the compensation as directed above, the revisionist will serve out the remainder of sentence.

¶13

A copy of this order be communicated to the trial concerned for necessary compliance.

¶14

The revision is disposed of to the aforesaid extent.

¶15

Order Date :- 3.4.2019

¶16

A. Pt. Singh

Abdul Salam and Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Salam and Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Kumar Gupta and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Kumar Bajpai Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sarita and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gulzar Singh Vs State of U.P and Another

Udai Veer and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Jaya Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another