Uttarakhand High Court
Sunil Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 10 January, 2024
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
10TH JANUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 658 of 2023
Sunil Kumar .....Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Another .....Respondents
Counsel for the Revisionist : Mr. B.S. Bhandari, Advocate with
Mr. Nalin Saun, Advocate.
Counsel for the State : Mr. Akshay Latwal, Brief Holder.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
Revisionist was convicted under Section 279 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, "IPC") and was sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months along
with a fine of Rs.500/-; he was convicted and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months along
with a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 337 IPC; he was convicted
under Section 338 IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of three months along with a fine of
Rs.500/-, and, he was further convicted and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year along with a fine of
Rs.1,000/- under Section 304A IPC. All the sentences were
directed to run concurrently.
2. An Appeal was filed by the revisionist. The said Appeal
(Criminal Appeal No.181 of 2018) has been dismissed vide
judgment dated 11.08.2023, passed by learned IVth Additional
Sessions Judge, Dehradun. Revisionist is in judicial custody since
28.08.2023.
3. Supplementary affidavit along with a copy of the District
Probation Officer, Dehradun's report dated 18.12.2023, filed by
the State, is taken on record.
4. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.11.2003, the
revisionist drove the Ambassador car (Registration
No.UA07A2019) rashly and negligently and hit a scooter
(Registration No.UP07G-0490). In the said incident, Jitendra alias
Jaggu was injured and the informant's nephew Sandeep died.
After conclusion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed.
5. Charges were framed. Revisionist-accused pleaded not
guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. The prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses.
7. The statement of the revisionist-accused was recorded
under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
8. Heard Mr. B.S. Bhandari with Mr. Nalin Saun, learned
counsel for revisionist and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Brief Holder
for State.
9. Admit.
10. Mr. B.S. Bhandari, 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 submission has not been opposed by the State.
12. Mr. Akshay Latwal, Advocate, has submitted that as per
the report of the District Probation Officer, Dehradun, conduct and
behavior of the revisionist have been found good and there is no
criminal case pending against him.
13. The present matter is pending since 22.11.2003. There
is nothing on record to indicate that the revisionist had earlier
been involved in any unacceptable activities.
14. After considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, it seems appropriate that the sentence, passed by learned
Trial Court and affirmed by learned 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.
16. Resultantly, the revisionist be released on probation on
good conduct for a period of one year, 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, Dehradun within a period of one week
from today.
17. Revisionist is in judicial custody. He is directed to be
released forthwith.
18. Registry is directed to send a copy forthwith to the
Superintendent of District Jail, Dehradun for necessary
compliance.
19. Registry is further directed to send a copy of this
judgment to the District Probation Officer, Dehradun for necessary
action.
20. Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the
learned counsel for revisionist, today itself, on payment of usual
charges.
21. The present Revision is disposed of accordingly.
___________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dated 10.01.2024
Neha
