Sarjeet Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

N.S. Dhanik, J

This criminal revision is preferred by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 12.02.2020 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2019, "Sarjeet Singh v. State of Uttarakhand" , whereby the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the order dated 24.01.2019 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No. 6197 of 2017. By the said judgment and order dated 24.01.2019, the revisionist has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 411 IPC and was sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default thereof to serve ten days additional simple imprisonment.

Learned senior 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 offence is maintained.

Learned State Counsel does not seriously object to the prayer made on behalf of the revisionist. He fairly concedes that revisionist has served 03 months 26 day in the jail.

Learned counsel for the revisionists submits that the revisionist is the poor person and the only bread earner of his family. He submits that revisionist has served 03 months 26 days in the jail and prays that the substantive sentence, awarded to the revisionist, may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

Since the revisionist has served 03 months 26 days, imprisonment and also considering the nature of the case, I am of the considered view that this much of sentence, as served out by the revisionist, is sufficient to serve the purpose.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the revisionist is the poor person, 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 to the period already undergone by the revisionist. The sentence of fine of the revisionist is enhanced from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 5,000/-. The enhanced amount of fine shall be deposited before the trial Court within one month. Amount, if any, deposited earlier shall be adjusted. If the revisionist fails to deposit the enhanced amount of fine within one month from today, he shall serve the additional two months imprisonment. Revisionist is reported to be in jail. He shall be released from the jail forthwith unless required in any other case. The impugned judgment and order stands modified to the extent indicated above.

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