Allahabad High Court
Bhagwan Das And Others vs State Of U.P. on 1 May, 2024
Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:78136
Court No. - 81
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2091 of 1988
Appellant :- Bhagwan Das And Others
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- W.H. Khan,Ajay Vikram Yadav,Devendra Singh,Raja Singh
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
As per report submitted by C.J.M. Banda appellant nos. 1 and 2 Bhagwan Das Gupta and Manni Lal have already died, therefore, this appeal to the extent of Bhagwan Das Gupta and Manni Lal stands abated. Now, appellant no. 3 Raju survives.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This appeal has been preferred by the appellants with a prayer to allow the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence awarded under Section 7 E.C. Act by judgment and order dated 30.08.1988 for a period of three months rigorous imprisonment and fine Rs. 500/- and acquit the appellants of the charges levelled against them and also pray to enlarge the appellants on bail during pendency of the appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant does not question the conviction as held by the learned trial court but he limits himself to the extent of sentence awarded by the learned trial court. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant was sentenced for a period of three months rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 500/- as fine with other two appellants those have already died. It is further submitted that the proprietor of shop was Bhagwan Das Gupta and Manni Lal was munim. Present appellant no. 3 being cousin of Bhagwan Das Gupta was present on the shop that was the reason he was also named in the F.I.R. It is also submitted that the license relating to the shop was suspended at that time even though business of sell and purchase of food-grain was being done by the appellants nos. 1 and 2.
It is also submitted that the incident took place in the year 1985 and judgment and order of conviction in question was passed in the year 1988. Now 39 years have elapsed and the appellant have also become 60 years of age and by sending him to jail no purpose will be served, therefore, request to modify the sentence or to reduce the sentence to the extent he remained in jail and fine.
Learned A.G.A. has no objection in this regard.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the fact that proprietor and munim have already died and present appellant was cousin of proprietor and he did not actively conducted the business. He remained in jail for a period of 20 days at the outset and has been awarded the sentence of three months rigorous imprisonment with fine Rs. 500/-. Since 39 years have elapsed till now and appellant has also become 60 years of age, therefore, in considered opinion of this Court the period of 20 days he remained in jail and fine Rs. 500/- will be adequate sentence and sending of appellant to jail will not serve any purpose. Accordingly, the sentence is modified to the extent appellant remained in jail and fine awarded by the learned trial court.
This appeal is partly allowed.
Lower court record be returned to the learned trial court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 1.5.2024
Suraj Srivastav
