Allahabad High Court
Shri Nath And 2 Ors. vs State Of U.P. on 9 September, 2022
Bench: Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
(Lucknow)
***
RESERVED ON 1.9.2022
DELIVERED ON 9.9.2022
Criminal Appeal No. 449 of 2005
Shri Nath And 2 Ors. ...Appellants
Through: Sri Dinesh Upadhyay, Counsel for the appellants
vs.
State of U.P. ...Opposite party
Through: Arvind Kumar Tiwari, Additional Government Advocate
ORDER
HON'BLE NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, J.
1. Present criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellants Shri Nath, Baij Nath and Siddh Nath against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.3.2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Faizabad in S.T. No. 636 of 1999 (State Vs. Salik Ram and others), P.S. Mawai, District Faizabad by which the appellants were convicted and sentenced to undergo for eight months Rigorous Imprisonment each for the offence under Section 323/34 of I.P.C and further to undergo three years Rigorous Imprisonment each along with fine of Rs. 1000/- each, in default stipulation, one month simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 308/34 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants have falsely been implicated in the case. The appellants and complainant both are closed neighbours. The injuries were not fatal for life, however, all injuries were fabricated. The trial court has wrongly convicted the appellants. The date of occurrence is 30.10.1997, accordingly, 25 years have gone by. They have undergone for the period of approximately one month. At present, the relation of appellants with complainant's family is cordial. However, appellants, who are sole bread earners for their families, are remorseful of their conduct to the society and they have feeling of transform themselves as a regret. They have no criminal history. The appellants are providing their lawful contribution towards the betterment of the society.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that they are not going to challenge the conviction order of the court rather they are praying for modification in order of sentence for the period already undergone by the appellants.
3. Learned AGA has submitted that the appellants have rightly been convicted in the case by the learned trial court. So far as the prayer for modification in order of sentence is concerned, he has no objection if the Court considers the mitigating circumstances of the case.
4. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA, I have gone through the record of the case properly.
5. In view of the prayer so made by the learned counsel for the appellants, the order of conviction passed by learned trial court is affirmed.
6. The provisions of Cr.P.C. has not given any straitjacket formula for sentencing. According to law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and High Courts, the sentence for the offence depends on so many factors like circumstances for commission of crime, character, antecedents of offenders, use of weapon, mode of crime, mental status and the age of offender. The socio economic condition also plays a vital role. It can be inferred that the object for sentencing should be reformative.
7. I have considered the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants and taking into consideration the fact that the date of occurrence was 30.10.1997, approximately 25 years have gone by. The appellants have undergone approximately one month imprisonment in furtherance of their sentencing order. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, appellants realized a regret to their mistake and are remorseful of their conduct to the society to which they belong. They have feeling of transformation in themselves. They have no criminal antecedents to their credit. No fruitful purpose will be served sending them in jail again after a long gap of time. The object of sentence is reformative. Therefore, in the opinion of the Court, the appellants should be given a chance to reform themselves, hence, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer of learned counsel for the appellants is allowed. Consequently, without interfere into the order of conviction, the sentence awarded by learned trial court is modified to the period already undergone.
8. Since the Court is taking a lenient view by altering the sentence awarded by the court below, therefore, it will be just and proper to award an appropriate compensation for the family of victim also. Accordingly, appellants, within two months from today, will deposit Rs. 10,000/- each as compensation before the Trial Court. The Trial Court will disburse the aforesaid amount of compensation to the victims in equal ratio. If it is found that victims are not alive, the said compensation amount be paid to their legal successor.
9. It is made clear that if the aforesaid amount of compensation is not deposited by the appellants as directed above, the trial court will recover the aforesaid amount in accordance with law.
10. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
11. Office is directed to send the copy of this order along with the record of the case to the court concerned for compliance.
(Narendra Kumar Johari, J.)
Lucknow
September 9, 2022
Amit
Whether the order is speaking:- Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable:- Yes/No
