The High Court, on criminal revision, sustained the conviction but modified the sentence, reducing it to the period already undergone.
Sentence modified to the period already undergone; petitioner discharged from bail bonds.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 1040 of 2007
Jhaksu Singh ….. …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ….. ….Opposite Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner :Mr. T. K. Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party :Mr. B. Shastri, APP
05/07.11.2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This revision application is directed against the judgment dated 10.4.2007 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pakur in Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2007; whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.02.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class. Pakur, corresponding to G.R. Case No.129/05 T.R. No. 555/07; whereby the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Sections 406 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of Three years with a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for three months; has been affirmed and the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer for modifying the sentence for the period already undergone as the case is of the year 2005 and the petitioner has faced the rigors of litigation for last 17 years and he also remained in custody for about 707 days. As such at this stage sending him back to jail even for short period will hamper the entire family; as such some leniency may be granted by modifying the sentence for the period already undergone.
4. Learned counsel for the State supported the judgments and submits that there is no error in the findings given by the courts below. As such, the conviction cannot be set aside, however the sentence may be modified in lieu of fine. 5. After going through the impugned judgment including the lower court records and keeping in mind the limited submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also the scope of revisional jurisdiction, I am not inclined to interfere with the finding of the courts below and as such the
2
judgment of conviction passed by the learned trial court and upheld by the learned appellate court is, hereby, sustained. 6. However, so far as sentence is concerned, it is apparent from record that the incident is of the year 2005 and about 17 years have elapsed and the petitioner must have suffered the rigors of litigation for the last 17 years. It is not stated that the petitioner has ever misused the privilege of bail and he also remained in custody for about 707 days and at present he is aged about 52 years.
7 . In a situation of this nature, I am of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner/convict back to prison; rather interest of justice would be sufficed if the sentence is modified for the period already undergone.
8. Thus, the sentence passed by the trial court and upheld by the appellate court is, hereby, modified to the extent that the petitioner is sentenced to undergo for the period already undergone.
9. With the aforesaid observations and modification in sentence only, the instant criminal revision application is disposed of.
10. The petitioner shall be discharged from the liability of his bail bonds.
11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court below and also to the petitioner through the officer-incharge of concerned police station.
12. Let the lower court record be sent to the court concerned forthwith.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Fahim/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the sentence should be modified taking into account the long pendency of the case and the time already undergone.
Jhaksu Singh
The State of Jharkhand
Deepak Roshan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
