Tripurari Pandey vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 4743 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.306 of 2011
[Against the judgment of conviction dated 28.03.2011 and order of sentence dated
29.03.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Hazaribagh
in Session Trial No.407 of 2006.]

                                    ----

Tripurari Pandey                                 ....     ....     Appellant
                                  Versus
The State of Jharkhand                           ....     ....     Respondent
                             ----
                           PRESENT
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
                             ----
For the Appellant                 : Mr. Santosh Kr. Soni, Adv.
For the State                     : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, A.P.P.
                             ----
By Court:

1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the State.

2. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction dated 28.03.2011 and order of sentence dated 29.03.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Hazaribagh in Session Trial No.407 of 2006.

3. It appears that the FIR has been lodged on 19.12.2002 making allegation that four to five persons had entered into the house of the informant and committed robbery and taken away ornaments and some cash. On the said information Chauparan P.S. Case No.162 of 2002 has been instituted and after investigation the appellant had been charged under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has claimed his innocence and claimed for trial.

4. To substantiate the allegation, altogether nine prosecution witnesses have been examined. Most of the prosecution witnesses are the eye witnesses who have seen dacoity and they had also recognised this appellant. Accordingly, the appellant has been named in the FIR and subsequently identified in the dock.

5. After conclusion of the trial, the appellant had been convicted under Section 395 IPC and sentenced for seven years along with fine.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant has confined his prayer for sentencing part only and it has been submitted that the incident is of the year 2002 and the appellant has remained in custody from 16.01.2006 till the order of bail dated 28.04.2011 passed by this Court. Further, it has been submitted that the appellant has no criminal antecedents and has long life to live. He has sufficiently suffered and on above basis reduction of sentence has been prayed.

7. On the other side, learned APP has supported the judgment of conviction dated 28.03.2011 and order of sentence dated 29.03.2011 and it has been submitted that since the appellant had been found guilty for committing robbery, sentencing of seven years is appropriate.

8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the record, it appears that there is sufficient evidence on record sustaining the conviction. So far as sentencing part is concerned, the appellant has remained in custody for more than five years. The incident is of the year 2002 and on the date of conviction he was aged about 32 years. No criminal antecedents have been reported against this appellant.

9. Considering the above facts, the order of sentence dated 29.03.2011 is modified and it is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant and fine amount of Rs.2,000/- is enhanced to Rs.5,000/- which should be paid within three months and in default of payment of fine the appellant will have to suffer one month simple imprisonment.

10. With above modification, the present appeal stands partially allowed. The appellant is discharged from the liability of the bail bonds.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi Dated 28th of November, 2022 Amar/NAFR/