Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sona vs State Of Uttarakhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3576 UK

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3576 UK
Judgement Date : 26 December, 2023

Uttarakhand High Court

Sona vs State Of Uttarakhand on 26 December, 2023

Author: Alok Kumar Verma

Bench: Alok Kumar Verma

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

                        26TH DECEMBER, 2023
               CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 162 of 2009


Sona                                                 .....Revisionist


                            Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                 ...Respondent


Counsel for the Revisionist :        Mr. A.M. Saklani, Advocate.

Counsel for the State       :        Mr. M.K. Khan, A.G.A.


Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The revisionist - accused Sona was convicted and

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of

four years along with a fine of Rs.20,000/- under Section 409

of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, "IPC").

2. Against the said judgment dated 20.08.2002, passed

by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Uttarkashi in Criminal Case

No.4 of 2000, a Criminal Appeal (Appeal No.15 of 2002) was

filed. Learned Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi modified the sentence

of imprisonment, imposed by the Trial Court, and sentenced

the revisionist to one year rigorous imprisonment instead of

four years.

3. As per the prosecution's case, ten Weaver Trainees

were being trained under the District Scheme in the year 1997-

98 in Uttar Pradesh Khadi Gramodyog and Utpadan Centre.

Trainees were to be given scholarship. Revisionist-accused was

appointed Incharge of Training Program. Revisionist paid them

only Rs.9,950/-. The remaining amount i.e. Rs.14,050/- was

not paid by him. Three loom machines were sold illegally by the

revisionist. The total price of the said machine was Rs.18,600.

The First Information Report was lodged by the District Village

Industries Officer, Uttarakashi on 25.09.1998.

4. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, a charge-

sheet was filed.

5. Charges, under Section 420 IPC and Section 409 IPC

were framed.

6. Prosecution examined eight witnesses.

7. Statements under Section 313 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973, were recorded. The revisionist-

accused denied all the incriminating evidence, produced by the

prosecution.

8. After hearing the arguments and appreciation of the

evidence, learned trial court acquitted the revisionist of the

charge of Section 420 IPC and convicted him under Section 409

IPC.

9. Heard Mr. A.M. Saklani, learned counsel for the

revisionist and Mr. M.A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

10. Mr. A.M. Saklani, Advocate has requested to alter the

sentence and grant benefit of probation to the revisionist under

the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

11. The said request has not been opposed by the State.

12. Mr. M.A. Khan, A.G.A., appearing for the State, has

filed a copy of the report of District Probation Officer, Tehri

Garhwal dated 18.12.2023. The said report is taken on record.

Learned A.G.A. submitted that as per the report of the District

Probation Officer, Tehri Garhwal, conduct and behavior of the

revisionist - Sona have been found good.

13. Present matter is pending since 1998. The age of the

revisionist is about 56 years. There is nothing on record to

suggest that the revisionist is involved in any unacceptable

activity.

14. After considering the facts and circumstances of this

case, it seems appropriate that the sentence, imposed by the

Appellate Court, should be altered and the benefit of probation

should be granted to the revisionist.

15. Consequently, without altering the findings of the

Courts below, the nature of the sentence is being altered. The

revisionist - Sona be released on probation on good conduct for

a period of six months, on his entering into a bond of

Rs.30,000/- with one surety of the like amount to appear and

receive sentence when he is called during such period. In the

meantime, he is directed to keep the peace and be of good

behavior. Revisionist is further directed to appear before the

District Probation Officer, Tehri Garhwal within a week from

today.

16. Registry is directed to send a certified copy of this

Judgment to the District Probation Officer, Tehri Garhwal for

necessary action.

17. The present Criminal Revision (No.162 of 2009) is

disposed of accordingly.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dated 26.12.2023 JKJ/Neha

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter