Allahabad High Court
Siya Ram vs State Of U.P. on 6 September, 2022
Bench: Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Judgment Reserved Reserved On : 24.08.2022
Delivered On:6.09.2022
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 553 of 1998
Appellant :- Siya Ram
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- S.D.Singh,Ajey Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
1. Present criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellants Siya Ram and Buddhoo alias Rakesh Singh, under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.09.1998, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Bahraich in S.T. No.299 of 1996, under Sections 307/504 IPC, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich. By the impugned judgment and order, appellant No.2-Buddhoo alias Rakesh was sentenced to undergo three and half years Rigorous Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.4000/- for the offence under Section 307 IPC and for the offence under Section 504 of IPC, appellant No.2-Buddhoo alias Rakesh was sentenced for a fine of Rs.1000/-; whereas appellant No.1-Siya Ram was sentenced to undergo two years' Rigorous Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/- for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC and for the offence under Section 504 IPC, appellant No.1- Siya Ram was sentenced for a fine of Rs.1000/-. In default stipulation, to undergo three months' additional rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were to run concurrently. The trial court had further directed to pay Rs.2000/- to the complainant as compensation out of the amount of fine so deposited.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants, at the very outset, has submitted that he is pressing the appeal only in respect of order of sentence. He is not disputing the order of conviction. Therefore, the conviction passed by learned trial court is hereby affirmed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that in the above case, the appellants were convicted by the learned trial court under Sections 307, 34, 504 IPC. Accordingly, appellant No.2 was sentenced for three and half years' Rigorous Imprisonment and Rs.4000/- as fine for the offence under Section 307 IPC, for the offence under Section 504 IPC, he was sentenced for Rs.1000/- as fine, in default, three months additional Rigorous Imprisonment. So far as the accused-appellant No.1-Siya Ram is concerned, he was sentenced by trial court for two years' Rigorous Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/- for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC and Rs.1000/- as fine for the offence under Section 504 IPC. In default, he was to undergo three months' additional Rigorous Imprisonment. Learned trial court had further directed to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation to the complainant from the amount of fine so deposited.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that during pendency of the appeal, appellant No.2-Buddhoo @ Rakesh Singh has died. Consequently, appeal has been abated for appellant No.2- Buddhoo @ Rakesh Singh. At present appellant No.1 is of 89 years of age and he is suffering from different kind of ailments and remains lying on cot. He is remorseful for the offences he was charged. Appellant No.1 has no criminal history to his credit. He is unable to move independently. The year of offence is 1994 and 28 years have gone by, hence, no fruitful purpose will be served in sending him again in jail. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Beyas Mahto Vs. State of Bihar, (2000) 9 SCC 509.
5. Learned A.G.A. has argued that appellant No.1 has rightly been convicted. There was sufficient evidence against him in trial court. However, he did not dispute the arguments of learned counsel for the appellants on the point of sentence.
6. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case as well as age, physical condition, antecedent of appellant, I find that it will meet the interest of justice if the sentence awarded to the appellant No.1 is modified and reduced.
7. Accordingly, so far as the conviction part is concerned, the conviction recorded against the appellant No.1-Siya Ram under Section 307/34 and 504 IPC is maintained but the sentence awarded is reduced to the period already undergone. However, the reduction of the sentence is on a condition that appellant No.1-Siya Ram will pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as fine. The appellant No.1-Siya Ram will deposit the aforesaid amount of fine in trial court within a period of four weeks from today. In default of payment of fine, the amount of fine shall be realized in accordance with law. The order of sentence is modified to the above extent.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
9. Office is directed to send the record along with a copy of this order to the court concerned for compliance.
(Narendra Kumar Johari, J.)
Lucknow :
Date : September 6, 2022
ML/-
Whether the order is speaking:- Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable:- Yes/No
