Sri Sagar Kumar Daniel vs State Of Orissa
2024 Latest Caselaw 10316 Ori

Orissa High Court

Sri Sagar Kumar Daniel vs State Of Orissa on 21 June, 2024

Author: D.Dash

Bench: D.Dash

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                               CRLA No.271 of 2003

             In the matter of an Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of
        Criminal Procedure, 1973 and from the judgment of conviction
        and order of sentence dated 31.10.2003 passed by the learned
        Special Judge, Sonepur in Sessions Case No.64/1 of 2003.
                                        ----

            Sri Sagar Kumar Daniel                ....        Appellant
                                      -versus-

            State of Orissa                       ....       Respondent

Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode):

                      For Appellant   -       Mr. P. K. Nanda,
                                              Advocate

                      For Respondent -        Mr. P. K. Mohanty,
                                              Additional Standing Counsel


                                    CORAM
                              MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

        Date of Hearing :20.05.2024       :   Date of Judgment : 21.06.2024

        D.Dash,J.          The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, has

assailed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence

31.10.2003 passed by the learned Special Judge, Sonepur in

Sessions Case No.64/1 of 2003, arising out of. G.R Case No.166 of

2002, in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,

Sonepur.

The Trial Court on examination of the evidence let in by the

prosecution and their evaluation, has held the accused guilty of

commission of offence under section 447/506 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC') while acquitting of the charge

under section 294 of the IPC and section 3(I)(X) of the Schedules

Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1985 (for

short, 'the SC & ST (PA) Act. Accordingly, the accused has been

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month for

the offence under section 447 of the IPC and rigorous

imprisonment for one year for the offence under section 506 of

the IPC with the stipulation that the sentences would run

concurrently.

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant (accused) from the

beginning instead of attacking the finding of guilt as against the

accused as has been returned by the Trial Court holding him

guilty of commission of offence under section 447/506 of the IPC,

confined his submission on the question of sentence. According

to him, the accused when faced the trial was about 35 years of age

and now he is more than 55 years old. According to him, the

evidence do not reveal that there was any prior planning from the

side of this accused, who hails from rural background for the

incident and he has also remained in custody for two months and

few days, when no such report is forthcoming that he has

indulged himself in any criminal activity nor it is said that he has

having any prior involvement in committing any offence. In view

of all these, he contended that at this distance of time for the

conviction of the accused for the offence under section 447/506 of

the IPC, if he sentenced to the period already undergone, that

would meet and serve the ends of justice.

3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent-State submitted that

the sentence imposed by the Trial Court commensurate the

offence.

4. Keeping in view the submissions made, I have carefully

read the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence

which have been impugned in this Appeal. I have also gone

through the depositions of P.W.1 to P.W.7 as also the documents

which have been admitted in evidence and marked Ext.1 to

Ext.6/1.

5. It reveals from record that the present age of the accused is

55+. The accused is a resident of village Akhidadar under Binka

Police station in the District of Sonepur, which was within the

area of erstwhile Feudatory State. It also reveals from the record

that the Appellant has remained in custody from 28.08.2002 to

05.11.2002. No such report is forthcoming that during all these

period, the accused has indulged himself in any criminal activity

nor it is said that he was having any previous antecedent to that

affect. Moreover, the accused has undergone mental agony of

criminal trial for more than 20 years by now.

6. Taking into account all these above factors at this distance

of time, this Court is of the considered view that while

confirming the conviction of the accused for the commission of

the offence 447/506 of the IPC that if he is sentenced to the

imprisonment for the period already undergone, that would

serve and meet the ends of justice.

7. In the result, the Appeal is allowed in part with the

modification of the sentence to the extent as indicated above.

(D. Dash), Judge.

Gitanjali

Designation: Junior Stenographer

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 27-Jun-2024 12:28:33