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
4 paragraphs · 224 wordsC.A. Rahim, J.—This Revision has been preferred against the judgment and order passed by the VIth Additional Sessions Judge. Gorakhpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 179/83, dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment and order dated 19.8.1983 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Gorakhpur, in Case No. 1325/82 u/s 324, I.P.C. By the said judgment the trial Magistrate sentenced the Appellant to suffer R. I. for one year and a fine of Rs. 500.
Sri Satya Prakash Srivastava, appearing for the applicant, has submitted that due to delay in disposing of this revision, the substantive sentence should be substituted by fine only. He has not challenged merits of the case and prayed for reduction of sentence on compassionate grounds. It appears that the revision is pending since 1984. The occurrence took place in February, 1978. So I find substance in the submission of the learned Counsel. Accordingly I feel that the alternative sentence when permitted under the Act it be extended in the instant case.
The revision is, therefore, allowed in part. The conviction u/s 324, I.P.C is confirmed but the sentence of imprisonment is substituted to fine of Rs. 1,500 (Rs. one thousand and five hundred) in all to be paid within three months, in default to suffer R.I. for four months.
With the above modification, the revision is disposed of.