Suresh vs State
2014 Latest Caselaw 1631 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                  Date of Judgment : 26.03.2014.
+      CRL.A. 203/2006
       SURESH                                      ..... Appellant
                          Through      Appellant with his counsel
                                       Mr.Usman Chaudhary, Adv.
                          versus
       STATE                                     ..... Respondent
                          Through      Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP

CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)

1 This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order

of sentence dated 24.01.2006 and 25.01.2006 respectively wherein the

appellant Suresh had been convicted for the offence under Section

307/34 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of

4 years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine

to undergo SI for 3 months.

2 Nominal roll of the appellant reflects that as on 30.06.2006, he

has suffered incarceration of about 7 months and 23 days besides

remission earned of 1 month and 20 days meaning thereby that he has

suffered incarceration for about 9 months and 15 days; he had been

granted bail on 07.08.2006. Another 1- ½ month accrued to his benefit

meaning thereby he had suffered a total sentence of 11 months.

3 Learned counsel for the appellant has not really assailed the

conviction. He has sought mercy for the appellant. His submission is

that the appellant (present in Court) is now 28 years of age; he is

married and has a two years old daughter; he has an aged father (also

present in Court) who is in his early 90's and the appellant is the only

bread winner of the family and no useful purpose would be served in

sending him back to jail and in case he is sent back to suffer

incarceration, his family will be on the verge of starvation.

4 Record shows that the present appellant along with two other

persons were involved in an incident which had occurred on 13.01.2003

wherein Tahira (PW-1) had sustained gunshot injuries. Her statement

(Ex.PW-1/A) was to the effect that she was residing in the vicinity of the

appellant; his co-accused Rohit (since declared a juvenile) along with

the other co-accused i.e. Mohd. Nafis and the present appellant had an

altercation with her; Rohit who was armed with a country made pistol

fired a shot at her; she sustained injuries. Her MLC (Ex.PW-9/A) has

been perused. She had suffered multiple pellet injuries tattooed over her

back. Injuries were opined to be 'simple'. Role attributed to the present

appellant was that he had caught hold of the hands of the injured;

admittedly the gunshot was fired by co-accused Rohit. No recovery was

effected from the present appellant. In this background, no useful

purpose would be served in sending the appellant to jail who is the only

bread-earner of the family having an aged father and a minor daughter to

support. Thus, keeping in view that the nature of injuries suffered by

the victim which were simple; the role attributed to the appellant being

that he had caught hold of the hands of the victim as also in view of the

fact that the appellant has already undergone incarceration for about 11

months, this period of incarceration shall be the sentence imposed upon

him. In addition, the appellant undertakes to pay Rs.25,000/- to the

victim Tahira. This money shall be deposited before the SHO, PS Nand

Nagri within two weeks. The concerned SHO shall ensure that the

money is paid to the victim Tahira. Compliance report will be submitted

within one month from today.

6      Appeal disposed off in the above terms.



                                             INDERMEET KAUR, J

MARCH 26, 2014/A