Orissa High Court
Ratnakar Sutar; And vs State Of Orissa on 1 July, 2024
Author: D.Dash
Bench: D.Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRA No.226 of 1990
In the matter of an Appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and from the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 18th August, 1990 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak, District-Balasore in
Sessions Trial No.9/24 of 1990.
----
1. Ratnakar Sutar; and .... Appellants
2. Jula Sutar
-versus-
State of Orissa .... Respondent
Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode):
For Appellants - Mr.S. Mohapatra,
G. Mohanty & P. Pradhan
(Advocates)
For Respondent - Mr.P.K. Mohanty
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM
MR. JUSTICE D.DASH
Date of Hearing : 21.06.2024 : Date of Judgment : 01.07.2024
D.Dash,J. The Appellants, by filing this Appeal, have called in
question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
18th August, 1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Bhadrak, District-Balasore in Sessions Trial No.9/24 of 1990
corresponding to Bonth P.S. Case No.51 of 1988 on the file of the
learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S.D.J.M.). Bhadrak.
By the impugned the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence, the Appellants (accused persons) have been convicted
for commission of the offence under section 498-A of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC'). Accordingly, they have
been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one (1)
year for commission of the the said offence.
2. Prosecution case is that accused, Abhiram Sutar (since
acquitted) had married the deceased (Jayantilata), who did not
belong to the caste of accused persons. He (Abhiram) was having
illicit relationship with the deceased for which the village gentries
in which due to intervention of local gentries, their marriage took
place in the village temple. When both of them were brought to
their house, the brother and mother of Abhiram, namely,
Ratnakar and Jula restrained them from entering into the house
and on the interference of the father of Abhiram, they were
allowed to live in another newly constructed room. It is alleged
that the deceased was not provided with food for which frequent
quarrel was going on and accused Ratnakar got them separated.
It is further stated that accused Ratnakar also threatened the
deceased to leave Abhiram and stay somewhere-else for which
she was subjected to cruelty by these accused persons and
committed suicide.
3. Upon registration of the criminal case under section
306/498-A/34 of the IPC, investigation started and on completion
of the Final Form, the Trial commenced. The learned Magistrate,
after taking cognizance of the offences, has committed the case to
the Court of Sessions. That is how the Trial commenced.
4. Learned counsel for the Appellants (accused persons), from
the very beginning, instead of questioning the finding of guilt
against these accused persons, as has been returned by the Trial
Court, confined his submission only on the question of sentence.
He submitted that taking into account the age of the Appellants
(accused persons) and the rural background from which they
hail, as they are now living on by running petty business and on
cultivation and maintaining their family, as they have already
undergone the mental agony of the criminal trial for about 35
years, the sentence of further imprisonment, as has been awarded
would stand too harsh. He, therefore, submitted that it is a fit case
that at this distance of time, keeping in view all the relevant
factors in mind, the sentence be appropriately modified to the
sentence of imprisonment for the period already undergo.
5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent-
State, while submitting that the offence for which the conviction
has been recorded against these Appellants (accused persons) is
punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
three years and fine, contended that the sentence of
imprisonment for a period 1 (1) year, as has been awarded by the
Trial Court commensurate the offence committed under that
circumstance.
6. Keeping in view the submissions made, I have carefully
read the impugned judgment of conviction and have also
extensively travelled through the depositions of the witnesses
(P.Ws.1 to P.W.7).
7. The Appellants (accused persons) stood charged for
commission of the offence under section 306/498-A/34 of the IPC.
Upon examination of the evidence of the witnesses examined
from the side of the prosecution, the Trial Court has found the
prosecution to have failed to establish the charge under section
306/498-A of the I.P.C against accused Abhiram, but has found
the prosecution to have proved its case against Appellants,
namely, Ratnakar & Jula under section 498-A of the IPC while
holding them not guilty under section 306 of the IPC.
The Appellants (accused persons) hail from the rural
background and as it appears, they have been undergoing mental
agony of a criminal trial right from the year 1990 till now for
more than three decades. Nothing is placed as regards their
criminal antecedent and as the evidence would reveal, no such
serious incident had ever happened during the period.
Cumulatively viewing of all these aforesaid, this Court is
the view that the sentence of imprisonment for the period already
undergone by accused (Jula Sutar) for committing the offence
under section 498-A of the IPC and payment of fine of Rs.5000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for six (6) months by accused Ratnakar Sutar at
this distance of time, would serve in the interest of justice and
meets its ends.
Accordingly, the Appellants' conviction for the offence
under section 498-A of the IPC being confirmed; they are
sentenced as afore-stated.
8. In the result, the Appeal is allowed in part with the
modification as to the order of sentence dated 18th August, 1990
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak,
District-Balasore in Sessions Trial No.9/24 of 1990 to the extent as
indicated above.
(D. Dash),
Judge.
Basu
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK
