High Courts

Bhim Nath Rai and Ors. vs State of U.P.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 25 August 1999 · Citation: (1999) 08 AHC CK 0102

HON’BLE JUDGES
B.K.Sharma, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 1880 of 1997
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 428 words

B. K. Sharma, J.—This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 7121987 passed by Sri R.N. Sircar, the then Sessions Judge, Ghazipur in Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 1987 preferred against the judgment and order, dated 2131987 passed by Sri Shiv Yatna Ram, the then 1st Additional Munsif Magistrate, Mohmadabad, Ghazipur in Criminal Case No. 1336 of 1984, State v. Bhimnath and others, whereby he reduced the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of six months of Abhai Narain Rai accusedrevisionist to three months rigorous imprisonment and that of Bhim Nath Rai, Hem Nath Rai and Prem Nath to one month rigorous imprisonment.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3.

The learned counsel for the accusedrevisionists has not pressed this revision on merits. The only prayer made by him is that the sentence of imprisonment of each of the accused revisionists be reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone consequent upon the dismissal of their appeal by the learned Sessions Judge, Ghazipur on 7th December, 1987. The learned counsel for the accusedrevisionists has pointed out that consequent upon the dismissal of the appeal, the accused revisionists were taken in custody the same day and that this Court had granted them bail only on 11121987. He further submits that since the matter related to Ghazipur, it would have taken a few days more time in the actual release of the accused revisionists on bail order and carrying the same to Ghazipur and furnishing sureties there. His argument is that the accused revisionists have already remained in jail for a period of atleast seven days. He has pointed out to the nature of the offence and also to the fact that the matter related to the year 1984 and since then much water flown in the Ganges. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the submissions of the learned counsel for the accusedrevisionists ought to be accepted.

4.

Consequently, the revision is dismissed on merit. The sentence of rigorous imprisonment of each of the accusedrevisionists as reduced by the learned Sessions Judge in the appeal in his judgment and order dated 7th December, 1987 is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by them as convicts after the dismissal of their appeal by the learned Sessions Judge, Ghazipur. They are on bail from this Court. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are cancelled and sureties are discharged.

5.

Let a copy of this order be sent by the office to the Sessions Judge, Ghazipur for information and compliance in the records. Revision dismissed.