Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Abdul Wahab vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 1057 Jhar

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1057 Jhar
Judgement Date : 15 March, 2022

Jharkhand High Court
Abdul Wahab vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 March, 2022
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               Cr. Revision No. 227 of 2004
                            ---------
     Abdul Wahab                        .....     Petitioner
                           Versus
     The State of Jharkhand.            .....   Opposite Party
                            ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---------

     For the Petitioner     : Mr. Abdul Hakim, Advocate
     For the State          : APP
                            ---------

03/Dated: 15th March, 2022

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This instant criminal revision application is preferred

by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated

06.01.2004 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1,

Rajmahal in Cr. Appeal No. 96/1989, Cr. Appeal No. 321 of

1993 whereby the judgment of conviction dated 31.03.1989

passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class

Rajmahal in G.R. Case No. 82 of 1983 (T.R.Case No. 165 of

1989), whereby the petitioner was convicted and setnced to

under one year R.I. for offence under Section 379 of the

I.P.C. has been affirmed and the appeal filed by the

petitioner was dismissed.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that in the night of

17/18.03.2003 the informant Dho-Dho Murmu of village

Amgachi while was sleeping in house, he heard dog barking

in the mid-night on which he woke up. He flashed his torch

and saw four miscreants committing theft of electric wires.

4. At the outset, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for

the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not habitual

offender. The petitioner has also undergone 243 days

imprisonment and now the petitioner is aged person. As

such, he is confining his prayer only on the question of

sentence as the petitioner is aged person and sending him

back to jail at this stage even for short period will hamper

the entire family; as such the sentence may be modified in

lieu of fine.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer of the petitioner and

submits that there is concurrent finding and there is no

error in the impugned judgments. As such, the conviction

cannot be set aside, however the sentence may be modified

in lieu of fine

6. After going through the impugned judgments

including the lower court records and keeping in mind the

limited submissions of the learned counsel for the

petitioner and also the scope of the revision jurisdiction, I

am not inclined to interfere with the finding of the courts

below and as such the judgment of conviction passed by

the learned trial court and upheld by the learned appellate

court is, hereby, sustained.

7. However, so far as sentence is concerned, it is

apparent from record that the incident is of the 1983,

and more than 38 years have elapsed and the petitioner

must have suffered the rigors of litigation for the last

38 years. It is not stated that the petitioner has every

misused the privilege of bail. Further, the incident does not

reflect any cruelty on the part of the petitioner or any

mental depravity. Further, the petitioner has also remained

in custody for 243 days.

8. In a situation of this nature, I am of the opinion that

no fruitful purpose would be served by sending the

appellant/convict back to prison; rather interest of justice

would be sufficed if the sentence is modified in lieu of fine.

9. Thus, the sentence passed by the learned trial Court

and upheld by the learned appellate Court is hereby

modified to the extent that the petitioner is sentenced to

undergo for the period already undergone subject to

payment of fine of Rs.2000/-.

10. It is made clear that the petitioner shall pay the

aforesaid fine of Rs.2,000/- within a period of four months

from today before the learned trial court; failing which he

shall serve rest of the sentence as directed by the learned

trial court.

11. With the aforesaid observations, directions and

modification in sentence only, this criminal revision

application is disposed of.

12. The petitioner shall be discharged from the liability of

his bail bonds.

13. Let the copy of this order be communicated to the

courts below as well as through the officer-in-charge of

concerned police station.

14. Let the lower court record be sent to the court

concerned forthwith.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

Amardeep/

 
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 Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter