Jharkhand High Court
Asharfi Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 July, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 389 of 2013
Asharfi Sharma, son of late Basudeo Sharma, resident of
Village Basagitia, P.O. & P.S. Bhabhua, District-Kaimur
(Bihar) ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
Through: Video Conferencing
14/06.07.2021
1. Heard Ms. Shilpi Sandil, learned amicus appearing on
behalf of the petitioner (since deceased).
2. Heard Mr. Tapas Roy, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the opposite party-State.
3. This revision application is directed against the judgment
dated 02.03.2013 passed by the learned District & Additional
Sessions Judge, Ghatshila in Cr. Appeal No. 205 of 2009,
whereby the learned appellate court has been pleased to
dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner and upheld the
judgment of conviction and sentence dated 18.07.2009 passed
by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ghatshila in
G.R. Case No. 194 of 1998, whereby the petitioner has been
convicted for offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal
Code and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment
for a period of two years and six months with a fine of Rs.
9,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine, the petitioner
was to serve the sentence of simple imprisonment of four
months.
4. The learned amicus for the petitioner submits that the
sole petitioner of the present case has expired on 09.05.2021 and
a supplementary-affidavit has been filed from the side of the
son of deceased-petitioner, wherein the death certificate has
also been annexed. She has specifically referred to para-9 of the
supplementary-affidavit, wherein it has been stated that since
the petitioner has deceased and is no more, the deponent being
the elder son of the deceased-petitioner, he and his siblings are
no longer interested in pursuing the present matter i.e., Cr.
Revision No. 389/2013 before this Court.
5. The learned amicus submits that apparently the legal
heirs are not interested in pursuing the present case, although
by the impugned judgment, a fine of Rs. 9,000/- was also
imposed against the deceased-petitioner.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite
party-State, on the other hand, has submitted that it is not in
dispute that the sole petitioner has expired, but the fine amount
is still to be realized by the State from the properties of the
deceased-petitioner.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this
Court finds that the sole petitioner of the present case was
convicted for offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal
Code to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years
and 6 months with a fine amount of Rs. 9,000/-. Considering
the fact that the petitioner has expired and his legal heirs, in
spite of having given an opportunity to represent the case, have
chosen not to contest the present case.
8. This Court finds that the learned courts below have
recorded concurrent findings after appreciating the materials
on record and no illegality or perversity, as such, has been
pointed out before this Court. On account of the death of the
sole petitioner, the present petition abates only with respect to
the sentence of the deceased-petitioner, but the fine amount
imposed by the learned court below would still be realized in
accordance with law. Accordingly, the learned court below is
directed to take all necessary steps to realize the fine amount.
9. The present petition is hereby dismissed in aforesaid
terms.
10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
11. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, are closed.
12. Let the lower court records be immediately sent back to
the court concerned.
13. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned
court below through 'E-mail/FAX'.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Mukul
