Shakir vs The State (Nct Of Delhi)
2014 Latest Caselaw 537 Del

$-19
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                    DECIDED ON : 28th JANUARY, 2014
+                 CRL.A. 138/2011 & CRL.M.A. 1495/2014
       SHAKIR                                       ..... Appellant
                       Through :   Mr.Bhupesh Narula, Advocate with
                                   Mr.Ashikesh Gupta, Advocate.

                             VERSUS
       THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)          ..... Respondent

Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J. (Open Court)

1. Shakir (the appellant) has filed the present appeal under

Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. to challenge his conviction by a judgment dated

12.07.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.

02/09 arising out of FIR No. 36/07 PS Seelampur by which he was held

perpetrator of the crime under Sections 397/411 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act.

By an order on sentence dated 15.07.2010, he was awarded RI for seven

years with fine ` 5,000/- under Section 392 IPC read with Section 397

IPC; RI for three years with fine ` 1,000/- under Section 27 Arms Act.

Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

2. On 26.01.2007 at about 07.00 A.M., ASI Prem Singh and

Const. Surender were on patrolling duty and when they reached at

Brahmpuri Road, they saw two boys running to opposite direction and

were being chased by an individual raising alarm 'pakro-pakro'. The said

two boys were apprehended and their names were ascertained as Gulam

Farid and Shakir. ASI Prem Singh lodged First Information Report after

recording Amir @ Salman's statement (Ex.PW-1/A) who disclosed that

the said boys had removed / snatched his mobile phone, purse containing

` 300/- at the point of knife. On search of the accused persons, mobile

phone, purse and knife were recovered from their possession. During

investigation, statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were

recorded. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted

against them. The trial resulted in their conviction.

3. During the course of arguments, appellant's counsel on

instructions stated at Bar that the appellant - Shakir has preferred not to

assail the findings of the Trial Court on conviction for the aforesaid

offences and accepts it voluntarily. He, however, prayed to take lenient

view as the appellant has undergone substantial part of the substantive

sentence and is not a previous convict. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor

has given consent for that.

4. Since the appellant has opted not to challenge to the findings

of the Trial Court on conviction in view of overwhelming evidence and

his arrest at the spot, the same are affirmed. Nominal roll dated

16.01.2014 reveals that he has already undergone four years, eight months

and fifteen days in custody besides earning remission for one year, one

month and twenty one days as on 13.01.2014. The unexpired portion is

one year, one month and twenty four days. The appellant was granted

regular bail, however, he was unable to avail it. He is not involved in any

other criminal case. His overall jail conduct is satisfactory. However, the

minimum sentence prescribed under Section 397 IPC cannot be modified

or reduced. The default sentence for non-payment of fine can be modified.

Accordingly, maintaining the substantive sentence awarded to the

appellant, the sentence order is modified to the extent that the default

sentence for non-payment of total fine ` 6,000/- would be fifteen days in

all.

5. Appeal stands disposed of in the above terms. A copy of the

order be sent to Superintendent Jail for information. Trial Court record (if

any) be sent back immediately.

CRL.M.A. 1495/2014 In view of the above, the application stands disposed of being infructuous.

(S.P.GARG) JUDGE

JANUARY 28, 2014/ tr