Partly allowed

Syed Saifulla v. Union of India by

Karnataka HC20 Jan 2023CRL.RP/802/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision petition against conviction and sentence for unlawful possession of railway property under Section 3(a) Railway Property Act. Court upheld conviction but substituted one year imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, directing payment of Rs. 95,000 as compensation and Rs. 5,000 as state expenses.

What did the court decide?

Quashed sentence of one year imprisonment; substituted with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- to be deposited within two months.

Syed Saifulla Vs Union of India by — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.RP No. 802 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 802 OF 2013

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SYED SAIFULLA S/O SYED IBRAHIM AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 7^TH CROSS, ANWAR COLONY, BHADRAVATHY, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-576116.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. KESHAVA BHAT A., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

UNION OF INDIA BY ASSISTANT SUB-INSPECTOR, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, BHADRAVATHI, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-576116.

¶13

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KRISHNA KUMAR K.K., HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

¶15

SRI. R.B.DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT. NOS.2 TO 5)

¶16

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH SECTION 401 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 22.12.2012 PASSED BY THE C.J. AND ADDL. J.M.F.C., TARIKERE IN C.C.NO.505/2007 AND CONFIRM DATED

¶17

¶18

CRL.RP No. 802 of 2013

¶19

18.09.2013 PASSED BY THE PRL. S.J., CHIKMAGALUR IN CRL.A.NO.16/2013 AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This revision petition is filed challenging the judgment of conviction dated 22.12.2012 passed by the Civil Judge and Addl. JMFC, Tarikere in C.C.No.505/2007 and consequent sentence, sentencing the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966. The petitioner has also challenged the judgment dated 18.09.2013 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur, in Crl.A.No.16/2013, whereby the judgment of the Trial Court was upheld.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the petition at length restricted his case to the order of sentence and submitted that the petitioner is only a receiver of the goods that were stolen and therefore, this Court may consider

¶24

¶25

CRL.RP No. 802 of 2013

¶26

sentencing the petitioner to pay fine rather than sentencing him to imprisonment.

¶27

This Court has found that MOs.1 to 8 that were

¶28

seized from the custody of the petitioner were not unproductive or valueless properties of the railways but were signal wires, fish plates etc., which are vital for any railway and removal of these vital elements to earn a few rupees more would spell a catastrophe to the passengers. Therefore, cases of this nature have to be dealt with sternly and in order to deter the persons such as the petitioner from engaging in similar such activities, this Court considers it appropriate to sentence him to pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/- instead of sentencing the petitioner to imprisonment.

¶29

In that view of the matter, this revision petition is allowed in part. The judgment of conviction dated 22.12.2012 passed by the Civil Judge and Addl. JMFC, Tarikere in C.C.No.505/2007, for the offence punishable under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 is upheld. However, the order of sentence to undergo simple

¶30

¶31

CRL.RP No. 802 of 2013

¶32

imprisonment for one year imposed by the Trial Court is modified to a sentence of fine of a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, which shall be deposited by the petitioner, before the Trial Court within a period of two months, in default, the petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

¶33

On deposit of the fine, a sum of Rs.95,000/- shall be paid as compensation to the Indian Railways and a sum of Rs.5,000/- shall be appropriated to the State towards expenses.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

PMR

¶36

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Syed Saifulla v. Union of India by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Saifulla v. Union of India by

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

Sri. Bhojaraj Vs Sri K Subramanya Bhat

Ms Ramya R Vs Mrs D Vijaya

Sri M N Narasimhamurthy Vs Smt Swathi H

Sri. Suresh Vs State by Station House Officer

Smt Parvathi Vs the State of Karnataka

Father Gregory Seravo Vs the State of Karnataka