Allahabad High Court
Vishal Sharma @ Shishir Verma vs U.O.I. Thru. C.B.I. on 9 May, 2024
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36332
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2504 of 2019
Appellant :- Vishal Sharma @ Shishir Verma
Respondent :- U.O.I. Thru. C.B.I.
Counsel for Appellant :- Mahesh Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
1. Heard Shri Anil Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Dharmendra Kumar Singh holding brief of Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-CBI.
2. The instant criminal appeal arising out of the judgment and conviction passed in Case Crime No.188 of 2017 arising out of RC No.9(A) of 2010, under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(D) of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station CBI/ ACB.
3. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant was sentenced for a period of two years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.25,000/- for the offence under Section 420 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC and for a period of five years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.50,000/- for the offence under Section 467 IPC and for a period of four years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.40,000/- for the offence under Section 468 IPC another concurrent sentence of four years along with Rs.40,000/- has been passed for the offence under Section 471 and a period of two years along with Rs.25,0000/- as fine for the offence under Section 419 IPC. In case of default of payment Rs.25,000/-, additional simple imprisonment for two months and for want of deposit of Rs.40,000/- byadditional simple imprisonment for a period of two months and similarly for non-payment of fine of Rs.50,000/- foradditional simple imprisonment of three months was awarded by means of the judgment and order dated 10.04.2017. All the aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant is in jail and he has already completed his sentences, however, since he could not deposit the fine, the appellant is still in custody.
5. It has further been pointed out that a Coordinate Bench of this Court while admitting the appeal on 05.05.2020 had granted bail on the terms of furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties and 50% of the fine of the amount was stayed while the remaining 50% was to be deposited within one month.
6. It has further been submitted that the appellant is a poor person and unable to deposit the fine coupled with the fact that insofar as the sentence is concerned, the maximum as granted by the trial Court was five years which has already been completed and in case, the Court reduce the amount of fine as held by the Apex Court in Shantilal v. State of M.P., (2007) 11 SCC 243, the appellant can be released after modifying the judgment and order passed by the trial Court.
7. Shri Dharmendra Kumar Singh holding brief of Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-CBI, on the basis of the written instructions, a copy of which has been provided to the Court and the same is taken on record, it is not disputed that the maximum sentence of five years have been served by the appellant and in case if the amount of fine is reduced, the respondent-CBI has no objection.
8. Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the CBI and going through the contents of impugned judgment, it is undisputed by learned counsel for the CBI that appellant is in jail since 19.12.2020 in the present case and maximum sentence is five years rigorous imprisonment and in default of payment of fine, he had to undergo for the period of three months additional imprisonment, as six years and odd months has already undergone by the appellant.
9. In the light of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shantilal (supra), the sentence is modified that in case of default of payment of fine, the additional confinement is hereby reduced to one week simple imprisonment in place of one month under Section 120B IPC, one weeksimple imprisonment in place of two months under Section 420 IPC, one weeksimple imprisonment in place of three months under Section 467 IPC, one weeksimple imprisonment in place of two months under Section 468 IPC, one weeksimple imprisonment in place of two months under Section 471 IPC, and one weeksimple imprisonment in place of one month under Section 419 IPC.
10. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The appellant shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other criminal case.
11. Office is directed to communicate this order forthwith to the Court concerned along with Senior Superintendent, District Jail, Lucknow to ensure compliance, and also to send back the lower court record alongwith copy of the judgment.
Order Date :- 9.5.2024
Rakesh/-
