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
7 paragraphs · 213 wordsLeave granted.
We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
For setting fire to the cycle shop of complainant-Brij Mohan Prajapati (PW-1) in the night of 13.02.1997 at about 04.30 a.m., the appellant-accused was convicted under Section 436 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years along with a fine of Rs.3,000/-. In appeal the High Court affirmed the conviction as well as the sentence of imprisonment.
Vide order dated 07.01.2019 notice was issued only limited to the quantum of sentence. As per jail certificate filed by the appellant, the appellant-accused is in custody and is undergoing the sentence of imprisonment from 13.04.2018 onwards.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State raised strong objection for modifying his sentence and submitted that the occurrence was grave in nature and no indulgence be shown to the appellant-accused.
Considering the fact that the occurrence was of the year 1997 and the period of sentence which the appellant has undergone and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the appellant from three years to one year.
The appeal is partly allowed.