Dumbi Alda And Ors vs State Of Jharkhand

An interlocutory application being I.A. No.11572 of 2019 has been preferred by the petitioners for recalling the order dated 06.09.2019, whereby the

bail granted to the petitioners by this Court was cancelled.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that initially the case was handed over to a counsel who is now not practicing in the

Jharkhand High Court.

It has been further submitted that he has been entrusted by the petitioners to represent this case and in view of that he has also filed fresh

vakalatnama in this case.

Learned APP does not dispute the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP, the order dated

06.09.2019, is hereby, recalled.

With consent of the parties main application is being taken up for hearing.

The instant application has been preferred by the petitioners against the judgment dated 02.08.2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West

Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Cr. Appeal No.68/2013, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed and the judgment of conviction

and order of sentence dated 21.06.2013, passed by the learned SDJM, Sadar at Chaibasa in G.R. No.288/2005(S), whereby the petitioners were held

guilty for the offence punishable under Section 409 IPC and were convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for one year each with fine of Rs.5,000/-

each, has been affirmed.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though there was an allegation to defraud the money arising out of a contract but it is an admitted

fact that the defalcated amount was returned to the Government. He further submits that as a matter of fact there was no any bad intention of the

petitioner rather they were poor villagers and due to that they used that amount in other things apart from the allotted contract job.

He further submits that there is no criminal antecedent of the petitioners. This is the only case in their entire life, in which they have been convicted.

As such, some leniency may be granted by this Court.

Per contra, learned Spl. P.P though supports the impugned orders but could not dispute the fact that the amount was returned by these petitioners and

there is no other criminal antecedent.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State. After going through the impugned orders including lower court record

and keeping in mind the limited scope of the revision jurisdiction, I am not inclined to interfere with the finding of the courts below and as such the

judgment of conviction passed by the learned trial court and upheld by the learned appellate court is, hereby, confirmed.

However, so far as sentence is concerned, it is apparent from record that the incident is of the year 2005 and 14 years have elapsed and the

petitioners must have suffered the rigors of litigation for the last 14 years and petitioner No.1-Dumbi Alda remained in custody for 138 days and

petitioner No.2- Barun Gope remained in custody for 69 days. It is not stated that the petitioners have ever misused the privilege of bail rather the bail

of the petitioners were cancelled by this Court due to non-representation of their case by the erstwhile counsel. Further, the incident does not reflect

any cruelty on the part of the petitioners or any mental depravity.

In a situation of this nature, I am of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served by sending the accused persons back to prison rather interest

of justice would be sufficed if the sentence is modified in lieu of fine.

Thus, the sentence passed by the Court below is, hereby, modified to the extent that the petitioners are sentenced to undergo for the period already

undergone subject to the payment of fine of Rs. 7,500/- each.

It is made clear that the petitioners shall pay the aforesaid fine of Rs.7,500/- each within a period of 3 months from today before the learned

Secretary, DLSA, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.

With the aforesaid observations, directions and modification in sentence, this revision application is disposed of.

The interlocutory application is also stands disposed of.

The petitioners shall be discharged from the liability of their bail bonds, subject to fulfillment of aforesaid condition.

Let the lower court record be sent back to the court concerned forthwith.

Let the copy of this order be communicated to the court below and the Secretary, DLSA, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa through 'FAX'.