Allahabad High Court
Shaukat And 3 Ors. vs State Of U.P. on 10 February, 2025
Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8316
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1078 of 2004
Appellant :- Shaukat And 3 Ors.
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- M.L.Syal,Shashi Kiran Arya
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
2. This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 23.04.2004 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge-V, Hardoi in Session Trial No. 485 of 1997 (State Vs. Shaukat and three others) arising out of Crime No. 69 of 1997, under Sections 436, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Pachdeora, District Hardoi by which appellants have been convicted and sentenced under Section 436 IPC for a period of five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 3000/-; under Section 504 IPC for a period of one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/-; under Section 506 IPC for a period of two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo additional imprisonment for a period of one year.
3. Facts in brief are that on 28.05.1997 at about 2 p.m., when the informant was sitting on his house, accused-appellants came there and threatened him to flee away or they will set his house ablaze on which he objected. At this the appellants set to thatch at fire which was reduced to ashes. On the same day F.I.R. was lodged at the police station concerned as Crime No. 69 of 1997, under Sections 436, 504, 506 IPC.
4. After investigation charge sheet was filed by the I.O. against the appellants under Sections 436, 504, 506 IPC, on the basis of police report the court concerned took cognizance and after compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C., case was committed for trial.
5. The trial court framed the charges against accused persons under Sections 436, 504, 506 IPC. It was read over and explained to them which they denied and claimed for trial.
6. The prosecution examined P.W. 1 Sajjad Ali, P.W. 2 Tasabbar Shah; P.W. 3 Samsher. P.W.4 S.I. Dan Narayan Maurya; P.W. 5 S.I. Brishketu Rai.
7. After conclusion of prosecution evidence statements of appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they denied the allegation and did not adduce any evidence in defence.
8. After hearing the arguments for the prosecution as well as the defence, the impugned judgment and order was passed by the learned trial court in which the appellants were convicted and sentenced. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment and order present appeal has been preferred.
9. Learned counsel for the appellants, without going into merit of the case submits that the incident said to have taken place on 28.5.1997 in which only thatch of the informant was set ablaze by the appellant Shaukat. No any property was destroyed or damaged. The appellants are illiterate and old persons.
10. Further submitted that the incident took place in the year 1997 and till now 27 years have elapsed and appellants have also become old, therefore, no purpose will be served by sending them to jail. There is no subsequent conduct of the appellants that they had committed similar offence, therefore, request to reduce the sentence as undergone and award compensation to be given to the injured persons since no purpose will be served by sending the appellants in jail.
11. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.
12. In the case of Ramesh Vs. State of U.P. AIR 1992 S.C. 664 where a single injury was found in the back of the neck of injured, appellant who was tried alongwith two others under Section 307/34 IPC and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years while two other were acquitted, appeal was partly allowed by Hon'ble the Apex Court. His conviction was altered into Section 324 IPC and sentence was reduced to the period already undergone with fine of Rs. 3000/- which was to be paid to the complainant as compensation.
13. In the case of Merambhai Punjabhai Khachar & Ors vs. State Of Gujarat, 1996 AIR 3236, there was an attempt to commit murder with fire arm and injury was by a pellet that struck the head, Hon'ble the Apex Court held that Section 307 IPC cannot be held to have been satisfied and conviction was altered to Section 324 IPC.
14. In the case of Neelam Bahal and another Vs. State of Uttarakhand 2010 (2) SCC 229 where conviction and sentence of appellant under Section 307 IPC was converted into Section 326 IPC simplicitor. Incident took place in the year 1987 and appellant was about 25 years old. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble the Apex Court, reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by him.
15. On considering the facts and submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants, it appears that only thatch of the informant was set ablaze. No other property was destroyed or damaged. 27 years have elapsed from the date of incident till now and now they have become old. By sending the appellants to jail no better purpose will be served though awarding compensation in its place may be adequate redressal.
16. To sum up the totality of case, in view of the aforesaid observation made by the Apex Court, this Court is of the view that no purpose will be served by sending the appellants to jail but it will be adequate to reduce the sentence as undergone by them and to impose compensation for Rs. 10,000/- that will be paid either to the injured persons or their survivors.
17. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the sentence awarded against the appellant no. 1 Shaukat, appellant no. 2 Rahmat, appellant no. 3 Azmat and appellant no. 4 Hikmat is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone by them and they are to deposit Rs. 10,000/- proportionately before the concerned court within a period of 45 days from today which shall be paid either to the injured or their survivors.
18. Trial court record along with this order be sent back to the concerned court for compliance.
Order Date :- 10.2.2025
Anurag Singh
