Bombay High Court
Vinod Ramdas Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 14 July, 2017
Bench: Sangitrao S. Patil
1 5-criappeal-64-02
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.64 OF 2002
Vinod Ramdas Patil,
Age : 26 years, Occ. Agri.,
r/o. Nandkhurd, Tq. Erandol,
Dist. Jalgaon ..Appellant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent
--
Mr.M.G.Patil, Advocate i/b. Mr.Girish Nagori,
Advocate for appellant
Mr.P.N.Kutti, APP for respondent
--
CORAM : SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.
DATE : JULY 14, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT :
The appellant (original accused no.1) has
challenged his conviction and sentence for the
offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian
Penal Code recorded by the learned 1st Ad-hoc
Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, in Sessions Case
No.89 of 1999 on 03.12.2001. The appellant has
been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
2 5-criappeal-64-02
three months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in
default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one
month.
2. The learned Counsel for the appellant
submits that the incident took place on
28.01.1999. The appellant has already undergone
imprisonment from 28.01.1999 to 23.03.1999 in
connection with this case. He submits that the
appellant has been acquitted of the offences
punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the
Indian Penal Code. The period of 18 years has been
lapsed after the date of incident. The offence
punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal
Code is minor one. He, therefore, on instructions,
submits that the appellant does not wish to
challenge his conviction on the grounds which have
been taken in the appeal memo, but prays that the
sentence of the appellant may be reduced to the
period which he has already undergone.
3 5-criappeal-64-02
3. The learned A.P.P. opposes this prayer.
4. As seen from the order under challenge,
the appellant was in jail in connection with this
case from 28.01.1999 to 23.03.1999 i.e. for a
period of 54 days. He has been sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay
a fine of Rs.1,000/-. The appellant has deposited
the fine amount on 03.12.2001. Out of the sentence
of imprisonment, he has already undergone the
imprisonment for 54 days. The incident took place
in the year 1999. The period of 18 years has been
lapsed after the occurrence of the incident. In my
view, no good purpose would be served by
confirming the quantum of the sentence and
directing the appellant to undergo the remaining
sentence of one month and some odd days.
5. I am inclined to accept the contention of
the learned Counsel for the appellant for
modification of sentence of imprisonment.
4 5-criappeal-64-02
6. In the result, I pass the following
order:-
(i) The Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The conviction of the appellant for the
offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian
Penal Code is confirmed. However, the order of
sentence is modified and the period of sentence is
reduced to the period, which the appellant has
already undergone i.e. from 28.01.1999 to
23.03.1999 (54 days).
(iii) Bail bonds of the appellant are
cancelled.
(iv) He is set at liberty.
(v) Appeal is accordingly disposed of.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.]
kbp
