Sahraj @ Anees Ahmad vs State Of Uttarakhand

N.S. Dhanik, J

This criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 19.09.2013 passed by learned District & Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal in

Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2013, whereby he has confirmed the judgment and order dated 09.05.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior

Division)/Judicial Magistrate, New Tehri, District Tehri Garhwal in Criminal Case No. 05 of 2012, “State vs. Sahraj @ Aneesh Ahmadâ€, whereby

the revisionist was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 279 IPC and sentenced to undergo three months simple imprisonment and for

the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment. Both the sentences shall run

concurrently.

Learned counsel for the revisionist does not press this revision on merits. He submits his arguments only on the quantum of sentence. Since the

revisionist’s counsel does not challenge the conviction, this Court need not go into the merits of the case and, accordingly, the conviction in the

aforementioned offences is maintained.

Learned State Counsel does not seriously object to the prayer made on behalf of the revisionist. She fairly concedes that revisionist has served

about 12 days in the jail.

Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is the poor person and the matter relates back to the year 2013. He further submits

there is no minimum sentence provided for the aforementioned offences. He submits that revisionist has already served about 12 days in the jail and

prays that the substantive sentence, awarded to the revisionist, may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the revisionist that revisionist is a poor person and the fact that matter relates back to the year

2013, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be sub-served. Consequently, the revision is dismissed on merit. However, it is partly

allowed on the quantum of sentence and the sentence is reduced under Section 279 IPC to two months simple imprisonment and further under Section

304-A IPC, the sentence is reduced to two months simple imprisonment, adjusting the period already undergone by the revisionist. All the sentences

shall run concurrently.

The impugned judgment and order stands modified to the extent indicated above.

The revisionist shall surrender before the Court concerned within one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Let a copy of this judgment and order, along with the LCR be sent back to the Court concerned.