Ratan @ Chaita vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 107 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 87
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5536 of 2016
 

 
Appellant :- Ratan @ Chaita
 
Respondent :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Bhole Ram,Kameshwar Singh,Krishna Kant Shukla
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Present appeal under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been instituted against the judgment and order dated 5.10.2016 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Hapur in Special Sessions Trial No.63 of 2015 State vs. Ratan @ Chaita convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 363 IPC for 5 years R.I. and Rs.5000/- fine and in default the payment of fine, 6 months additional rigorous imprisonment and under Section 366 IPC, 5 years R.I. ad in default of payment of fine, 6 months additional rigorous imprisonment and for Section 376 IPC, 10 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.10,000/- fine and in default of payment of fine,one year additional rigorous imprisonment and under Section 4 of POCSO Act, 10 year rigorous imprisonment and Rs.10,000/-fine and in default of payment of fine, one year additional rigorous imprisonment. Further direction was given that all the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that accused appellant is in jail and he has undergone total sentence including remission of 9 years, 1 month and 5 days as per the certificate issued by the concerned jail dated 31st July, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing the appeal so far as conviction of the accused appellant is concerned and the appeal may be dismissed against the conviction. However, he has submitted that so far as sentencing of accused appellant is concerned, the maximum sentence awarded to him is 10 years rigorous imprisonment and as per the jail certificate, he has already undergone more than 9 years. He, therefore, submits that considering the sentence already undergone, this appeal may be disposed of with reduction of 10 years sentence already undergone.

4. Learned AGA appearing for the State has no much objection to the said prayer of the learned counsel for the appellant.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts and the submissions on behalf of the accused appellant and the State, the appeal is dismissed so far as the conviction of the accused appellant for offences for which he has been convicted, is concerned. However, the sentence of the accused appellant is reduced to the sentence already undergone.

6. Considering the long incarceration of the accused appellant, the order of fine is set aside.

7. The appeal is partly allowed.

[Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.]

Order Date :- 2.1.2023

SP