Jharkhand High Court
Surendra Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 22 August, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 267 of 2005
(Against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, both dated
08.02.2005, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track
Court-II, Jamshedpur, in Sessions Trial No. 05 of 2004)
Surendra Singh ..... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
---------
For the Appellant : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
Ms. Sonal Jaiswal, Advocate
For the Resp.-State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, APP
--------
05/ 22.08.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and
the order of sentence, both dated 08.02.2005, passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Jamshedpur, in Sessions
Trial No. 05 of 2004, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years under Section 304 part II/34
of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 15.08.2003 after doing their
duties in their work place i.e. Mercy Hospital, the appellant and husband of
the informant decided to take liquor as both of them were given Rs.100/-
each by the Hospital Authority. After consuming liquor they were returning
their houses. In the meantime, son of the appellant asked as to why he had
consumed so much liquor and uttering filthy languages with him. It is
alleged that the appellant and his son assaulted the victim-deceased with
fists and slaps. It is further alleged that deceased returned to his house and
narrated the entire story to her wife and they went to the house of appellant
to ask from them as to why the accused did so and while they were on the
way, the appellant and his son started abusing and assaulted with fists and
slaps on the belly of deceased due to which he started vomiting and
thereafter the informant with the help of one Madhu Kumar took her
husband to the hospital where he was declared dead by the doctor.
4. At the outset learned Counsel for the appellant submits that he has
filed a supplementary affidavit wherein it is stated that the appellant is now
suffering from cancer and for this he is under regular treatment at Saroj
Gupta Cancer & Research Centre, Kolkata. He went under tongue surgery
due to the cancer and as a result of which he is not able to speak clearly as
such looking to the present condition of the appellant the sentence may be
modified for the period undergone.
5. Leaned APP does not dispute the aforesaid contention of the learned
counsel for the appellant and submits that so far as original appellant No.1-
Jitendar Kumar Singh @ Jitender Kumar Singh @ Jitu is concerned he has
died and his name is also deleted vide order dated 04.07.2022. So far as
surviving appellant No.2-Surendra Singh is concerned he is suffering from
cancer.
6. Having regard to the facts of the case and looking to the peculiar
condition of the appellant interest of justice would be sufficed by
sustaining the conviction, however, sentence ought to be modified for the
period already undergone. From perusal of record it appears that appellant
remained in custody for about 4 months.
7. Taking into consideration of mitigating circumstances, I am of
considered view that without interfering with the judgment of conviction,
the sentence is modified to the extent that the appellant shall be released for
the period already undergone.
8. As a result, the sentence as ordered by the learned trial court is
hereby modified to the extent that the appellant is sentenced for the period
already undergone.
9. With the aforesaid observations, directions and modification in
sentence only, the instant criminal appeal stands disposed of.
10. The appellant shall be discharged from the liability of his bail bond.
11. Let a copy of this order and the lower court record be sent to the
court concerned forthwith.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Pramanik/
