Nanda @ Nand Ram vs State Of U.P. & Anr.
2021 Latest Caselaw 4561 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 16
 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 256 of 2018
 
Revisionist :- Nanda @ Nand Ram
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Anr.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Gulam Mustafa
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard and gone through the entire record.

2. This criminal revision under Section 397/401 CrPC has been filed against the judgment and order dated 07.08.2013 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/A.C.J.M., Court No. 1, Sitapur in Criminal Case No.469 of 2012, convicting and sentencing the revisionist under Section 377 IPC five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/ and, in case of default in payment of fine, six months additional imprisonment, and under Section 506 IPC one year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine, one months additional imprisonment. It was also directed that all the sentences will run concurrently.

The revisionist has also challenged the order dated 25.01.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Sitapur by means of which Criminal Appeal No. 68 of 2013 filed against the said order of conviction and sentence has been dismissed.

3. This Court vide order dated 09.03.2021 called for a report from the Senior Superintendent, District Jail, Sitapur regarding the sentence already undergone by the accused-revisionist.

4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the Senior Superintendent, District Jail, Sitapur has sent report dated 22.03.2021, stating therein that the revisionist has already undergone 3 years, 8 months and 15 days and with remission 4 years, 4 months months and 8 days.

5. The learned counsel for the revisionist submits that he does not want to challenge the order of conviction and sentence on merit, but considering the fact that more than 90% of the sentence has already been undergone by the revisionist, the revisionist may be released.

6. Mr. Shivam Sharma, learned counsel for the State, does not make much objection to the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the revisionist.

7. Thus, while upholding the order of conviction, the sentence is modified to the extent of the sentence already undergone by the revisionist.

8. Let the revisionist, Nanda alias Nand Ram, convict of the said criminal case, be set free forthwith from the District Jail, Sitapur, if he is not warranted in any other case.

9. In view of the aforesaid, this revision stands disposed of.

[D.K. Singh, J.]

Order Date :- 24.3.2021MVS/-