Dannoo and Another vs State of U.P.

B.K. Sharma, J.—This is a revision against the judgment and order dated 14.5.1984 passed by Sri Radhakant the then XIIIth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanpur in Criminal Appeal No. 30 of 1984, whereby he dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and order dated 24.2.1984 passed by Sri S.K. Tripathi. the then Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat, convicting the accused revisionist Dannoo of the offence under Sections 323 and 452, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for a period of 6 months for the offence u/s 323, I.P.C. and R.I. for a period of one year for the offence u/s 452, I.P.C. and convicting the accused-revisionist dannoo of the offences under Sections 324 and 452, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for a period of one year for the offence u/s 324, I.P.C. and to undergo R.I. for a period of one year for the offence u/s 452, I.P.C. and directing that both the sentences in the case of each accused-revisionist shall run concurrently.

Out of the accused-revisionist, accused-revisionist No. 1 Dannoo had died during the pendency of this revision and consequently this revision has abated to his extent.

Heard learned Counsel for Mannoo accused-revisionist No. 2 and the learned A.G.A.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Mannoo accused-revisionist has not challenged the conviction of this accused-revisionist for the offences under Sections 324 and 452, I.P.C. He has made submissions only on the question of sentence. He has pointed out that the occurrence related to the year 1974 and the accused-revisionist was coming down on bail from the month of June, 1984 up till now. He has further pointed out from the record of this revision that this accused-revisionist had surrendered in Court on 31.5.1984 in pursuance of the judgment and order dated 14.5.1984 of the Additional Sessions Judge and that this Court had passed the bail order in his favour only on 13.6.1984 and that the matter having related to Kanpur Dehat, it would have taken a few more days for obtaining the actual release of the accused-revisionist from jail after furnishing bonds before the Magistrate concerned there. In short, the argument is that he has already suffered R.I. in jail for a period of atleast a fortnight. He has further argued that sending the accused-revisionist back to jail now after such a long gap of time would do more harm than good. He has prayed that the sentence of imprisonment in the case of each offence may be reduced to the period already undergone. This prayer may be accepted to the extent that in lieu of the reduction in the sentence of imprisonment, suitable amount of fine may be imposed and time may be granted to pay the same.

In my view, a sum of Rs. 1,000 may be the proper amount of fine. In default of payment of fine, simple imprisonment for a period of 10 days may serve the ends of justice.

The revision is consequently partly allowed. The conviction of the accused-revisionist Mannoo for the offences under Sections 324 and 452, I.P.C. as awarded by the trial court and as confirmed by the lower appellate court is maintained. However, for each offence, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced from one year R.I. to the imprisonment for the period already undergone by him as a convict and in lieu thereof, the sentence of fine of Rs. 1,000 is imposed. In default of payment of each fine, the accused revisionist Mannoo shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 10 days. He is allowed 1 month time to pay the fine in the Court of the Magistrate concerned. In default of payment of fine within the time permitted, the accused-revisionist Mannoo shall be got arrested by the Magistrate and consigned to the District Jail concerned to serve out the sentence.

Let a copy of this judgment and order be sent within a week from today by fax to the C.J.M. Kanpur Dehat, requiring him to submit compliance report to this Court by 1st July, 1999. This revision shall be listed again before this Court on 7.7.1999 for orders along with the compliance report of the C.J.M., Kanpur Dehat.

Let a copy of this judgment be issued to the learned Counsel for the revisionist Mannoo within a week from today on payment of usual copying charges.