Partly allowed

Sri Apurba Sarkar v. State

Calcutta HC3 May 2023CRR/2150/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a revisional application challenging a conviction under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act. Finding merit in the petitioner's plea for relief due to the trauma of prolonged proceedings, the Court modified the sentence to allow credit for time spent in custody and increased the fine.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner sentenced to imprisonment for period already undergone and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- within four weeks.

Sri Apurba Sarkar Vs State — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

03.05.2023 BMJR Court no.236 Item no.2.

¶2

CRR 2150 of 2003

¶3

Sri Apurba Sarkar Versus The State

¶4

Mr. Sabir Ahmed,

¶5

Mr. Hillol Saha Poddar,

¶6

Mr. Suma Biswas

¶7

….for the Petitioner

¶8

This revisional application challenges judgment and order dated 22^nd August, 2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1^st Fast Track Court, Cooch Behar in Criminal Appeal No.48 of 2002 affirming thereby the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cooch Behar in CR Case No.83 of 2001, thereby recording an order of conviction against the petitioner for committing offence under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act and sentenced him to suffer regorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only).

¶9

Briefly stated,d that on 5^th April, 2001 the RPF officials together with jurisdictional police raided the shop of the appellant and seized good number of railway properties from the said place. The petitioner Apurba Kumar Sarkar could not justify his possession. Prosecution was initiated against him under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act. The petitioner, as accused, stood trial by pleading inocence. The learned Trial Judge, after considering the testomony of thirteen witnesses, was pleased to record an order of conviction. The accused made unsuccessful attempt to get the order reversed in Criminal Appeal No.48 of 2002.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceeding was started on 5^th April, 2001. During the last twelve years the petitioner has been suffering the trauma of the criminal proceeding and he has been carrying the baggage of agony because of the order of conviction. He has spent twenty days in custody during the trial. Now he has rectified himself, therefore, considering the period of agony and anxiety to which the petitioner has been passing through, maintaining the order of conviction, the sentencing part, may be interfered with by this Court.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstsances of the case, I do not find any reason to disagree with the view catered by Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

In my opinion, ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for the period already undergone and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (One lac only) within four weeks from date before the learned Trial Court, failing which, he will have to serve out the sentence imposed upon him by the learned Trial Court. Learned Trial Court is directed to inform the department if the petitioner fails to comply with the direction as aforesaid.

¶13

The criminal revisional application is disposed of.

¶14

Let a copy of this judgment and order be sent down to the learned Trial Court for information.

¶15

Parties may act upon the server copy of the order duly downloaded from the server of this High Court.

¶16

(Siddhartha Roychowdhury, J.)

Sri Apurba Sarkar v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Apurba Sarkar v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamal Sk Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

MD Ayub & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Akadoshi Manna@Ekadoshi Manna Vs State of West Bengal

Rajesh Jaiswal @ Dabbu & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Dilip Bose@Dilu Vs State of West Bengal

Paritosh Adhikary & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.