Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Subrata Roy vs State
2001 Latest Caselaw 957 Del

Citation : 2001 Latest Caselaw 957 Del
Judgement Date : 23 July, 2001

Delhi High Court
Subrata Roy vs State on 23 July, 2001
Equivalent citations: 93 (2001) DLT 149
Author: R Sodhi
Bench: R Sodhi

JUDGMENT

R.S. Sodhi, J.

1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.5.1997 of the learned Additional sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 60/96 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge held the appellant guilty under Section 376, IPC and further by his order dated 23.5.1997 sentenced the appellant-accused to undergo R.I. for ten years with a fine of Rs. 1,0001/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for three months.

2. The case when called out tody, nobody appeared for the appellant in support of the appeal, inspire of warning being indicated in the cause list. Since this is a case of 1994 it can brook no further delay. Mr. R.P. Luthra is present on behalf of the Legal Aid. I, therefore, appoint him as amices Curiae to assist me in this case.

3. With the assistance of leaned amices Curiae and leaned Counsel for the State, I have gone through the recorded of the case. Learned amices Curiae on the basis of the record fairly concedes that he cannot fault the judgment of conviction. He, however, confines his arguments only to the question of sentence. From the nominal roll it is clear that the appellant has suffered the ordeal of trial for seven years and has undergone the sentence for six years and three months while earning remission of one year and ten months. His conduct during the trial has been satisfactory. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in requiring him to undergo the remaining portion of his sentence at this belated stage. Learned Counsel for the State has no objection of the sentence of the appellant is reduced to that already undergone.

4. Having heard leaned Counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, I am of the opinion that the order of conviction cannot be faulted with but sentence can be reduced. In this view of the matter, while upholding the order of conviction, I reduce the sentence to that already undergone.

(SIC) A. 436/97 is disposed of.

The appellant who is in jail shall be set at liberty forthwith.

5. Appeal disposed of.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter