Jharkhand High Court
Bhunnu Mian vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 August, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 176 of 2005
---------
(Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both
dated 13.01.2005 passed by learned District & Sessions Judge,
Latehar, corresponding to S.T. No.04 of 2004.)
-------
1. Bhunnu Mian
2. Fakhru Mian ..... .... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand. ..... .... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
-------
For the Appellant :Mr. Jamil Akhtar
For the Respondent-State :Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P
.........
07/30.08.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred against
the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated
13.01.2005 passed by learned District & Sessions Judge, Latehar,
corresponding to S.T. No.04 of 2004, whereby the appellants have
been convicted for the offence under Sections 307/34 of the IPC
and they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of Seven
years with a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default of payment of
fine further to undergo S.I. for three months.
3. The brief fact of the case is that on 02.09.2003 after
watering his field the informant returning home as he reached
near the back of the house of appellants, suddenly appellants
started assaulting him due to which he received several injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has made the
following submissions:-
(i) The appellants have been falsely implicated with
malicious motive.
(ii) P.W-4 is only independent witness who did not
support the prosecution's case. Rest of the witnesses are close
relative as such they are highly interested witnesses.
(iii) Evidences are contradictory in nature.
After the aforesaid submission, he further made an
alternative argument that the incident is of the year 2003 and the
appellants have suffered the mental agony due to ongoing
litigation and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court may kindly at least modify the sentence for the
period already undergone as the surviving appellants are aged
about 75 and 45 years and there is no criminal antecedent of the
appellants and appellant no.1 & 2 also remained in custody for
about One and half year and Six months receptively.
5. Learned APP opposed the prayer for acquittal and
submits that the learned trial court has not committed any error
in convicting the appellants. However, he fairly submits that as
per record, there is no any criminal antecedents of the appellants;
as such, if the sentence is modified, then the same should be
modified in lieu of fine.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after
going through the impugned judgment and the documents
available on LCR, and looking to the comprehensive facts and
circumstances of the case and the deposition of the prosecution
witnesses who have considerably proved the case of the
prosecution and the findings of the trial court does not suffer from
any infirmity as such, this Court is not inclined to interfere with
the Judgment of conviction and thus the same is sustained.
7. Now coming to the alternative argument of learned
counsel for the appellants with respect to sentence awarded to
them; this Court is of the view that at this stage remitting the
appellants to the rigors of imprisonment at this juncture of their
life would not serve the ends of justice.
8. Thus, on point of sentence, looking to the entire facts
and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the alleged
incident took place in the year 2003 and about 20 years have
passed and that period is sufficient to exhaust anybody mentally,
physically and economically and the appellant no.1 & 2 also
remained in custody for about One and half year and Six months
respectively and they never misused the privilege of bail.
9. Taking into consideration of mitigating circumstances,
I am of considered view that without interfering with the judgment
of conviction, the sentence ought to be modified to the extent that
the appellants shall be released for the period already undergone,
but subject to payment of fine of Rs.20,000/- each.
It is made clear that the surviving appellants shall pay
the aforesaid fine of Rs.20,000/- each within a period of 4 months
from the date of receipt of this order, before the D.L.S.A., Latehar;
failing which they shall serve rest of the sentence as ordered by
the learned trial court.
10. With the aforesaid observations, directions and
modification in sentence only, the instant criminal appeal stands
disposed of.
11. The appellants shall be discharged from the liability of
their bail bonds, subject to fulfillment of aforesaid condition.
12. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the trial
court, Secretary, DLSA Latehar, and the appellants through the
O/I of the concerned Police Station and the LCR be sent back to
the court concerned forthwith.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Fahim/-
