Jaibir vs State Of U.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 2665 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 69
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 133 of 1998
 

 
Revisionist :- Jaibir
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Sudhir Agarwal,Adya Gupta,Tapan Ghosh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 4 of 2021

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I am satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the Criminal Revision within the period of limitation.

The application is, accordingly, allowed and the delay in filing the Recall application is condoned.

Criminal Misc. Restoration/Recall Application No. 5 of 2021

This is an application for recalling the order dated 26.09.2019 dismissing the Criminal Revision in default.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application, the application is allowed. The order dated 26.09.2019 is recalled in the light of order dated 16.11.2020 passed by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 750-751 of 2020 arising out of SLP (Crl) Nos. 4292-4293 of 2020 (Parveen vs. State of Haryana) and the Criminal Revision is restored to its original number.

Order on Criminal Revision

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., has been filed aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 24.01.1998 passed by IInd Additional Sessiions Judge, Ghaziabad. The IXth Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad vide order dated 04.03.1997 convicted revisionist and sentenced him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 304-A, one month under Section 279 I.P.C. three months under Section 427 IPC and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Thereagainst, revisionist preferred Criminal Appeal No.20 of 1997 and Appellate Court while dismissing the appeal confirmed order of conviction passed by Trial Court. Being aggrieved the revisionist preferred present revision.

Learned counsel for the revisionist at the very outset stated that he is not assailing judgment of the Courts below on merits, but is seeking mercy stating that this is an old matter and accused-revisionist is now attained advance age, therefore, sentence of imprisonment awarded to him be reduced to the period already undergone which is four and half months.

Looking to the entire facts and circumstances, while maintaining the conviction, I am inclined to reduce sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone though a fine of Rs. 1000/- each is imposed against revisionist.

Accordingly, Revision is partly allowed. The revisionist, who is in jail, shall be released from jail forthwith subject to deposit of fine of Rs. 1000/-.

Certify the judgment to the Court below immediately.

Order Date :- 19.2.2021

Rmk.