Allahabad High Court
Prem Pal vs State Of U.P. on 22 February, 2021
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2033 of 2000
Revisionist :- Prem Pal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Revisionist :- P.C.Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.3 of 2021
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Amrit Raj Chaurasiya, 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. 4 of 2021
This is an application for recalling the order dated 15.11.2019 dismissing the Criminal Revision in default.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Amrit Raj Chaurasiya, 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 15.11.2019 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.
.
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4 of 2021
Bail application of the applicant is dismissed as infructuous.
.
Order on memo of revision
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Amrit Raj Chaurasiya, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 28.8.2000 passed by IInd Additional Sessions, Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2000, dismissing it and upholding earlier judgement and order dated 27.03.2000 passed by C.J.M., Etah in Criminal Case No. 1606 of 1999 (State Vs. Prem Pal) convicting the revisionist under Section 452 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000/- and convicting the revisionist under section 354 IPC and sentencing him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and in default of payment of fine, to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.
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. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that incident took place on 24.04.1996 and at that time punishment under Section 354 I.P.C. was upto 2 years and no minimum sentence is prescribed in Section 354 IPC. Further, the maximum punishment awarded to the revisionist is one year and the revisionist has already undergone five months, therefore, sentence of imprisonment awarded to him be reduced to the period already undergone.
Looking to the entire facts and circumstances and considering this fact that except this case revisionist is having no criminal history, while maintaining the conviction, I am inclined to reduce sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone though a fine of Rs. 2000/-.
Accordingly, revision is partly allowed. Conviction of accused-revisionist is maintained, but, sentence awarded by Trial Court is modified and reduced to the extent of sentence of imprisonment already undergone by accused-revisionist subject to deposit of fine of Rs. 2000/-. The revisionist shall be released from jail forthwith subject to deposit of fine of Rs. 2,000/-
Certify the judgment to the Court below immediately.
Order Date :- 22.2.2021
Arvind
