State Of U.P. vs Jag Narayan Yadav
2021 Latest Caselaw 4081 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 88
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1356 of 2021
 

 
Appellant :- State of U.P.
 
Respondent :- Jag Narayan Yadav
 
Counsel for Appellant :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (1) of SC/ST Act as Amended, has been preferred by the State-appellant with the prayer to set aside the judgment and order dated 08.12.2020 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, Sonbhadra, in Special Trial No.43 of 2016 arising out of CNR No.UPSB01002025-2016, under Sections 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. & 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Anpara, District Sonbhadra whereby the trial court after vetting the entire evidence and considering the facts and circumstances of the case has found the case for releasing accused-respondent Jag Narayan Yadav on probation with direction to deposit a sum of Rs.5000/- towards cost of proceeding and also to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- to the informant for the injury caused within ten days from the date of order.

The instant appeal is only on the point of sentence. Against the judgment and order impugned in this appeal, the State has grievance that the sentence imposed by the trial Judge is inadequate. Initially the trial was conducted for offences under Sections 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. & 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Anpara, District Sonbhadra. It is gathered from record that the incident of Marpit took place on throwing of garbage, hurling caste words. The respondent is first offender without any criminal antecedent, therefore, mind of the trial Judge is reflected by fact that there is scope of reformation of the respondent and imposing harsh sentence on the respondent would not serve the interest of justice. Therefore, with a view to reform the respondent, mild view was taken by the trial Judge imposing only fine on the respondent.

Upon perusal of the record, it is obvious that after considering the entirety of the case, the trial Judge rightly convicted respondent. Insofar as sentencing part of the impugned jugdment and order is concerned, its real objective is to ensure betterment of individual as well as society to which the appellant belongs. The impugned judgement and order passed by the trial Judge imposing the minimum sentence by directing the respondent to be released on probation coupled with fine as aforesaid, requires no interference by this Court.

Accordingly, the judgment and order dated 08.12.2020 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, Sonbhadra, in Special Trial No.43 of 2016 arising out of CNR No.UPSB01002025-2016, under Sections 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. & 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Anpara, District Sonbhadra against the appellant is upheld.

In view of above, the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed.

Let a copy of this judgment be certified to the trial court for necessary information and follow up action.

Order Date :- 19.3.2021

rkg