Kishan @ Sri Krishna vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 11924 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 482 of 2010
 

 
Revisionist :- Kishan @ Sri Krishna
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Manzal Ali Khan,Anurag Dwivedi,Ashish Kumar Singh,B.L. Yadav
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard and perused the record.

2. The present revision under sections 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed against the Judgment and Order dated 29.01.2010 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Hardoi whereby the revisionist was convicted under Sections 323, 325 and 504 IPC and sentenced for maximum term of four years rigorous imprisonment with fine stipulation. It was further directed that all the sentences would run concurrently.

The order dated 29.11.2010, by means of which Criminal Appeal No.12 of 2010 filed against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Magistrate has been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Hardoi, has also been sought to be quashed.

3. The incident took place 28 years back. The two courts have concurrently held the revisionist guilty for the offences, mentioned above.

4. Learned counsel for the accused-revisionist submits that the accused-revisionist has not been convicted previously for any offence and he is the first time offender. The learned counsel at the outset submits that he is not challenging the impugned order, confirming the order passed by the trial Court, but he is confining his submission only with respect to the order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court.

5. It is not disputed that the accused-revisionist is the first time offender and was not previously convicted in any other case. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that in view of the express provisions of Section 361 Cr.P.C., considering the facts and circumstances, nature of the offence, the character of the accused-revisionist and particularly, the time period which has lapsed since the date of incident, the benefit of Section 4 of the Act may be granted in this case.

6. In view of the above facts and circumstances mentioned and considering the scope of Section 4 of the Act, this revision is, accordingly, dismissed by upholding the conviction of the accused-revisionist. However, he is granted the benefit of Section 4 of the Act. The accused-revisionist is released on probation. Accused-revisionist shall file a personal bond to the tune of Rs.20,000/- for a year and he shall keep peace in the society and shall not commit any such offence in future. The accused-revisionist shall file the bond within a period of one month from today.

7. Considering the provisions of section 5 of the Probation Act, the revisionist is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.30,000/- (rupees thirty thousand) to victim, Rais, within four weeks from today. He shall deposit the said amount of Rs.30,000/- before the learned trial court, which shall be disbursed forthwith to victim, Rais, on due verification and, in case of his death, to his legal heir(s), as the case may be.

8. In case of breach of any of the said condition, the accused-revisionist will subject himself to undergo the sentence.

9. Let the copy of this judgment as well as the lower court record, if received, be transmitted to the concerned Trial Court forthwith for necessary compliance.

Order Date :- 31.8.2022

MVS/-