Deena Nath Singh vs State of U.P.

Saeed-Uz-Zaman Siddiqi, J.—This appeal has been preferred by accused-applicant against judgment and order dated 10.1.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Court No. 5), District-Barabanki in S.T. No. 245 A/1990 arising out of Crime No. 51/89 by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 436/34, I.P.C. and he has been awarded a sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and pay Rs. 500 as fine. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A.

Brief facts of the case are that one. Muni Ram. son of Sri Roop Narayan, resident of Pipraha Farm, P.S.- Kursi, District-Barabanki lodged an F.I.R. on 23.4.1989 at about 10.00 a.m. He was lying in his shop, after taking lunch; two persons were seen by him moving towards west which was back side of the shop, who put fire to the engine installed over there. He raised alarm when accused-appellant and one Lal Babu fled away. Due to their committing mischief of fire, Pata measuring 30 feet, pipe measuring 10 feet, pata of soft measuring 15 feet, and plastic pipe measuring 10 feet were burnt including four cots, two razai, two blankets, three shirts, 27 quintal wheat costing Rs. 20,000 was burnt. After lodging of the F.I.R., the investigation was concluded and charge-sheet was submitted. Ultimately, the accused were committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. During the pendency of the trial. the accused Lal Babu absconded and as such, the trial against the accused-appellant was separated.

The learned trial court framed charges against the accused for offence punishable u/s 436/34, I.P.C. to which he denied and claimed trial. After examination of the accused u/s 313, Cr.P.C., the accused has been convicted. hence the appeal.

During the course of arguments learned counsel for the appellant conceded that the findings made by and conclusions arrived at by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, are not being challenged on point of facts or on point of law.

A single prayer was made on point of sentence.

I have heard and carefully perused the records.

While passing the impugned order of sentence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has ignored the injury in the form of damages caused by the accused-applicant to the victim nor has imposed any sentence to pay fine, which may be paid to the victim, as compensation.

A perusal of the file shows that there is no infirmity in the discussions made by and conclusions arrived at by the learned trial court. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant also do not press the appeal on point of conviction. He only prays for commutation of sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by the accused-appellants. This plea is fortified by the fact that the offence relate to the year 1989. i.e., 23 years back.

Sri R.K. Saini, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the accused have remained in jail for about four months. The case pertains to the year 1989. The ends of justice would meet successfully if the accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment already undergone and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000.

While reaching to this conclusion, I justify my judicial conscience that during this span of about a quarter century, the trend of the society has taken a vertical change. It is the defect in the system that this Court could not take up this appeal for hearing for a decade, for which this Court feels guilty, but it is beyond the domain of the High Court as Judges are probably meagre in number to cope with the pendency, due to apathy and indifference of the executive, qua any country of the world. The innocent public is raising fingers as against the efficacy and efficiency of the Courts, though the defect lies somewhere else, i.e., the Executive.

People, by and large, are rapidly loosing confidence in the criminal judicial system; victims feel ignored and are crying for attention for justice and; there is a demand that the system must focus on justice to victims, as well. A traditional judicial system must take note of the pulse of the society at large. Courts are parts of the society and cannot overlook the will of the people; underneath there is a feeling which advocates replacement of the vertical criminal judicial system by a "horizontal line of justice" where the punishment system is sought to be substituted by a system which gives a central role for the victims.

A practical aspect of the matter is that though maintenance of law and order is a State subject, yet the victim is a complainant who activates the machinery of the Criminal justice system by bringing evidence and information about illegal acts to the attention of the authorities. If the police activates in actual operation, as required by law of the land, the victim then plays an additional role as a witness for the prosecution and helping the State to secure a conviction.

Since crime is conceptuated as an event that threatened and offended the entire community, and was prosecuted by the State on behalf of the people, the actual victim is treated like just another piece of evidence, a mere exhibit to be discarded after the trial.

The time is over-ripe to redress, restore and readjust the injustice and imbalance to the crime victims by the Judges, the prosecutors and probation officers etc. Every instrument of State machinery, in general and Judges being guardian of guardians, in particular, to ensure explicit standards of fair treatment to protect the interests of victims and witnesses. The victims ought to receive reimbursement from one source or the other.

The penal philosophy in India is derived from the British model which is based upon concepts of prevention of crime and treatment and rehabilitation of criminals. Victims have no rights, who suffer injustice silently and, in extreme cases, depend upon the mercy of police officers.

The courts have to draw a silver lining between offenders and offended (victims) through affirmative action; and take a lead to compensate and reimburse the victims under the existing provisions of the Penal Code contained in Chapter-Ill, Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and other Special Statutes where provision of imposition of fine is prescribed pending draft of Victims Assistance Bill'' to become statute prepared by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer under National Human Rights Commission, with a view that no citizen should feel ignored by applying psycho-social coping model'', the dynamic component of which should be (i) prevention; (ii); action; and (iii) Reappraisal with a will to eliminate and reduce stress in the society, at large.

The Courts should take note of the fact that the Parliament has amended Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure so as to entitle a complainant in a criminal case to file appeal in case the accused gets acquittal or gets lesser punishment. impose adequate compensation so as to indulge the victim in the process of justice.

Victims have a valid interest in prosecution of the case and should be involved at all stages of the proceedings. Talking day in and day out about interest of the accused and neglecting the victims is resulting in hostility of victims and ultimately acquittal, which is eroding the majesty of law and justice.

Current situation of criminal justice deserve to cope with international standards so as to cement the fact that Judges, by and large, are sympathetic and not alien to victims.

It will reflect transparency and honesty in the corridors of Justice. As early as in 1983, the Apex Court has recognised the need of State compensation in cases of abuse of power by State machinery, in Rudul Sah Vs. State of Bihar and Another, .

Similarly, in Saheli, A Women''s Resources center, Through Ms Nalini Bhanot and Others Vs. Commissioner of Police Delhi Police Headquarters and Others, , compensation was granted to victim''s mother.

In D.K. Basu Vs. State of West Bengal, , it was held, "To repair the wrong done and give judicial redress for legal injury is a compulsion of judicial conscience."

In P. Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of Karnataka, . the Hon''ble Supreme Court reverted its earlier orders in Common Cause A Registered Society through its Director Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, , permitting closure of petty criminal cases the trial in which had not commenced even after the lapse of two to three years after institution. The court noted a remedy might "resort to taking revenge by unlawful means resulting in further increase in the crimes and criminals."

Under Clause 12 of the U.N. Declaration, the onus is on the State to "endeavour to provide financial compensation to both the victims who have suffered bodily injury or impairment of physical or mental health as a result of serious crimes as well as the family of those who'' have died as a result of victimization."

Judicial and administrative mechanisms should be established and strengthened where necessary to enable victims to obtain redress through formal or informal procedures that are expeditious, fair, inexpensive and accessible. Victims should be informed of their rights in seeking redress through such mechanisms.

Victims should be treated with compassion and respect for their dignity. They are entitled to access to the mechanisms of justice and to prompt redress, as provided for by national legislation, for the harm that they have suffered.

In view of the abovementioned aspects, I confirm the conviction awarded by the learned Session Judge to the accused-appellants but convert the sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by him; Subject to condition that the accused applicant Dina Nath Singh to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 before the learned trial court within thirty days from today which shall, in turn, be paid to the victim, without delay, by the learned trial court. In the case of default, the accused-appellant has to undergo six months imprisonment, which shall be terminated earlier, as soon as the fine is deposited.

With these observation, the appeal is disposed of, in such a fashion that it is partly allowed. The conviction is confirmed but the sentence is modified as stated above. The Registry is required to circulate the copy of this judgment to all the Session Judges/ C.J.Ms., who, in turn, be directed to dispense with justice in accordance with law, Keeping in view of the directions contained as above, in such a fashion, that a message may be transmitted to the society, at large, that Courts are not meant to award punishment alone, each and every citizen may feel involved in dispensation of justice, without a feeling of being ignored at any stage, of the criminal justice system, which are conscious enough to stand boldly to the aspirations of the society; with the object to refurbish the existing image.