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
9 paragraphs · 367 wordsD.C. Dalela, J.—By the judgment dated 7.8.95, the learned Sessions Judge, Pali, has convicted the accused appellants for the offence u/s 412, IPC and sentenced him to a rigorous imprisonment for six years and three months and a fine of Rs. 250/-The accused appellant was convicted along with two other accused persons, but this appeal relates only to the accused appellant, Sardara. The accused appellant was, however, acquitted of the offences u/s 459, 460, 395, 396 and 397, I.P.C.
Against this conviction and sentence of the appellant, this appeal has been preferred.
I have heard the arguments of both the learned counsel.
The learned counsel for the appellant has stated at Bar before me that he does not challenge the conviction of the appellant for the offence u/s 412, IPC, but he has prayed for the leniency in the sentence.
The learned Public Prosecutor has expressed no objection in taking the lenient view so far as the sentence is concerned.
It the case of Amar Singh and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court has reduced the sentence from four years to two years rigorous imprisonment for the offence u/s 412, IPC.
The learned Public Prosecutor after going through the record of the learned trial court has stated at Bar that the accused appellant has remained in custody for a total period of about 4 years.
Having regard to the above authority of the Supreme Court, I think the ends of justice in the case will be met if the sentence of rigorous imprisonment awarded by the learned trial court is reduced to the period already undergone. However, the sentence of fine should be maintained.
In the result, this appeal is party allowed. The conviction of the accused appellant for the offence u/s 412, IPC is upheld and maintained. The sentence of imprisonment awarded by the learned trial court in reduced to the imprisonment for the period already undergone. The sentence of fine awarded by the learned trial court is maintained. In default of payment of fine, the accused appellant will undergo a further rigorous imprisonment for the period as already awarded by the learned trial court.
