Subhash Puran vs State Of Jharkhand

The instant application is directed against the judgment dated 07.03.2014, passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Jamshedpur

in Criminal Appeal No.150 of 2010, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been partly allowed.

The learned trial court vide its judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.05.2010, passed in G.R. No.1555/2004 (T.R. No.449/2010)

convicted the petitioner for the offence under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo RI for 2 months

under Section 279 IPC, RI for 2 months under Section 337 IPC, RI for 6 months under Section 338 IPC and RI for 6 months under Section 427 IPC

and all sentences were directed to run concurrently.

The learned appellate court while affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence given by the learned trial court with respect to Sections

279, 337, 338 IPC, acquitted the petitioner from the charge under Section 427 IPC.

The learned counsel for the petitioner confines her argument on the question of sentence only and submits that the petitioner remained in custody for

about 2½ months. She further submits that there is no criminal antecedent of the petitioner and this is the single case in which he has been

convicted.

Per contra, the learned APP supports the impugned orders but could not dispute the fact that there is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner

save and except the present one.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

After going through the impugned orders including lower court records and keeping in mind the limited submissions of the learned counsel for the

petitioner and also the 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 2004 and 15 years have elapsed and the petitioner

must have suffered the rigors of litigation for the last 15 years and also remained in custody for 41 days. It is not stated that the petitioner has ever

misused the privilege of bail. Further, the incident does not reflect any cruelty on the part of the petitioner 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 person 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 petitioner is sentenced to undergo for the period already

undergone, subject to the payment of fine of Rs. 25,000/-.

It is made clear that the petitioner shall pay the aforesaid fine of Rs.25,000/- within a period of 3 months from today before the Secretary, DLSA,

Jamshedpur.

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

The petitioner shall be discharged from the liability of his 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, Jamshedpur.