* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL. APPL.No.785/2004 and Crl.M.A.8656/2008
Date of decision : 01.09.2008
KISHAN @ BABLU ..... Appellant
Through : Ms. Purnima Sethi, Adv.
Versus
THE STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through : Mr M.P. Singh, APP.
AND
(2) CRL. APPL. No. 848/2004
SHIV RAJ @ SWARAJ @ SURAJ ..... Appellant
Through : Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Adv.
Versus
STATE OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through : Mr M.P. Singh, APP.
%
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ARUNA SURESH
(1) Whether reporters of local paper may be
allowed to see the judgment?
(2) To be referred to the reporter or not?
(3) Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest ?
JUDGMENT
Crl.A.Nos. 785/2004 & 848/2004 Page 1 of 4
ARUNA SURESH, J. (Oral)
1. By this common order I shall dispose of two Criminal Appeals being Crl.A.No.785/2004 titled Kishan v. State and Crl.A.No.848/2004 titled 'Shiv Raj @ Swaraj @ Suraj v. State' as both the appeals are the outcome of the judgment and order on sentence dated 28th August, 2004 and 6.9.2004 respectively passed in Sessions Case No.14/2001, titled as 'State Vs. Raju etc., being FIR No.402/2000, under Sections 392/397/34 IPC, Police Station Keshav Puram.
2. Appellant Kishan @ Bablu and appellant Shiv Raj @ Swaraj @ Suraj were convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 392/397/34 IPC by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his judgment dated 28th August, 2004 and vide his order on sentenced dated 6th September, 2004 they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for seven years along with a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default two months R.I. for an offence under Sections 392/397/34 IPC. Benefit under Crl.A.Nos. 785/2004 & 848/2004 Page 2 of 4 Section 482 Cr.P.C. was also given to both the appellants.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submit that they would not press their appeal on merits but they have prayed that a lenient view be taken and the appellants be awarded sentence already undergone by them in this case.
4. Appellant Kishan @ Bablu is in judicial custody since 28.10.2000. He was on regular bail for the period from 27.04.2001 to 27.08.2004. He has already undergone imprisonment for a period of four years five months, whereas appellant Shiv Raj @ Swaraj @ Suraj is in judicial custody since 28.10.2000, though he remained on regular bail for the period from 18.04.2001 to 27.08.2004. He has suffered imprisonment for about four years five months.
5. Considering the fact that both the appellants are in judicial custody for a long period and their behavior has been found satisfactory by the jail authorities and also as per the nominal roll they are not in Crl.A.Nos. 785/2004 & 848/2004 Page 3 of 4 custody in any other case and they are first offenders, it is in the interest of justice that the prayer as made for reduction of sentence is allowed.
6. Hence, prayer as made is allowed. Appellants are sentenced to suffer imprisonment for the period already undergone by them, subject to their depositing the fine as imposed upon them by the trial court. The order on sentence passed by the learned ASJ on 6.9.2004 stands modified accordingly.
7. Appeals stand disposed of accordingly.
8. Attested copy of the order be sent to the trial court as well as to the concerned Superintendent Jail for necessary compliance.
ARUNA SURESH, J.
SEPTEMBER 01, 2008 vk Crl.A.Nos. 785/2004 & 848/2004 Page 4 of 4