Jharkhand High Court
Shahjadin Khatoon vs The State Of Jharkhand on 2 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Revision No.97 of 2018
----
Shahjadin Khatoon .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Muniya @ Muneja Khatoon .... .... Opposite Parties
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, Adv.
For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P.
----
nd
08/Dated: 02 December, 2021
1. The instant criminal revision application has been filed against the
impugned judgment dated 12.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in Criminal Appeal No.05 of 2009 whereby and
whereunder the learned appellate court has dismissed the appeal filed against
the judgment and order dated 02.01.2009 passed by the learned J.M. 1st
Class, Giridih by which the revisionist has been convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced her
to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and further sentenced her to pay fine
amount of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine sentenced her to
undergo imprisonment for a period of nine months.
2. At the very outset, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
revisionist that the matter has been settled between the parties outside the
court. Taking into note of the said facts, Md. Maksud (husband) of the
complainant has been given the benefits of Probation of Offenders Act in
Criminal Appeal No.27 of 2009 and accordingly sentence of three years has
been reduced to the period already undergone and the fine amount of
Rs.8,000/- has been imposed.
Similar benefits have been prayed by this appellant also who is
mother-in-law of the victim/informant.
3. From perusal of the record, it appears that the nature of allegation is
domestic in nature. The matter has been settled between the parties outside
the court and on that basis benefits have been already given to the husband
by the court below.
4. Considering the above facts, materials available on record, the nature
of allegation, period of litigation between the parties and settlement arrived
between the parties outside the court, the order of sentence is modified to the
extent that imprisonment of one year is reduced to the period already
undergone (the revisionist has already been in custody around 20 days), and
the fine amount is enhanced to Rs.8,000/- to be paid to the
victim/complainant within two months. In default of the same, the
revisionist is directed to undergo 15 days simple imprisonment.
The petitioner, who is already on bail, is discharged from the liability
of the bail bond.
With above modification, the criminal revision stands disposed of.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Amar/-
