High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ambika Singh And Anr. vs The State Of Bihar on 8 April, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ambika Singh And Anr. vs The State Of Bihar on 8 April, 2011
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CR. REV. No.429 of 2011
              1. AMBIKA SINGH S/O- LATE BKHORI SINGH
              2. PANKAJ SINGH, S/O- AMBIKA SINGH
              BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE- NEYA, P.S.- MUFASSIL,
              DISTRICT- NAWADAH.
                                             Versus
                                   THE STATE OF BIHAR
         For the petitioners     : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate.
         For the State           : Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, APP
                                           -----------

2 08.04.2011 After hearing both the sides, this Court is

satisfied that matter requires consideration only on the

question of sentence.

Hence Rule confined to question of sentence

only.

Learned A.P.P. waives notice on behalf of the

State.

With the consent of the parties, the application

is being finally disposed of at this stage.

Petitioners herein are father and son. They are

aggrieved by the judgment dated 13.1.2011 passed in Cr.

Appeal No. 22/2001/13/2010 by learned Addl. Sessions

Judge-cum-Fast Track Court No. II, Nawada whereby the

appeal preferred by the petitioners stood dismissed with

modification in sentence. For an occurrence that had taken

place on 7.9.1998 , petitioners herein along with some other

accused persons were put on trial vide Tr. No. 1110/2001.

Four witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant

(P.W. 2). The three injureds namely P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3
2

supported the prosecution case. On a consideration of the

materials on record, learned Trial Court found and held them

guilty under Sections 147, 323 and 452 of Indian Penal

Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 01 years, R.I. for 06

months and R.I. for 02 years respectively. Aggrieved over

the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction, they

preferred appeal which was dismissed with modification in

sentence. Learned Appellate Court concurred with the

findings of guilt recorded by the learned Trial Court.

However the sentence awarded under Sections 147, 323

and 452 of Indian Penal Code was/were reduced to fine of

Rs. 500/-, fine of Rs. 1000/- and R.I. for 06 months with fine

having default clause respectively.

Learned counsel submits that admittedly the

occurrence had taken place on account of land dispute as

has been admitted in the complaint. The said occurrence

had taken place on 7.9.1998. The trial of the petitioner

consumed over three years. The appeal thereafter remained

pending for 09 years. It is submitted that fighting criminal

litigation for a long time and thereby to undergo

rigours/ordeal thereof is a shade of punishment which need

to be kept in focus. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1 was

found aged about 62 years at the time of recording

conviction. It is said that he is now close to 70 years of age.

Learned APP, on the other hand, submits that
3

there is/are concurrent findings of guilt recorded by the two

Courts below which have not been shown to be perverse

meriting interference on merit. It is submitted that reasons

have been assigned by learned Trial Court for not giving the

petitioner benefit of the provisions under Section 360 of the

Code.

I have considered the submissions made on

behalf of the parties and perused the two judgments

impugned in this proceeding. It is obvious from the materials

on record that for more than three years, the petitioner had

to undergo rigours of trial. Petitioner No. 1 was found aged

about 62 years at the time of conviction. It appears from

Trial Court judgment that they are the first convicts.

Occurrence had taken place on account of bona fide land

dispute between the parties. Considering all these aspects

of the matter, this Court is satisfied that they deserve

consideration on the question of the sentence.

Accordingly, while upholding the conviction

recorded by the learned Trial Court and duly affirmed by

learned Lower Appellate Court, the sentence awarded to the

petitioners by learned Appellate Court is reduced as under:

(i) Petitioner No. 1 shall undergo R.I. for 02

months under Section 452 of Indian

Penal Code. Other part/conditions of

sentence shall remain intact/unaltered.
4

(ii) Petitioner no. 2 shall undergo R.I. for 04

months under Section 452 of Indian

Penal Code. Other part(s)/condition(s) of

the sentence shall remain

intact/unaltered.

With this modification in sentence, the

application is dismissed.

( Kishore K. Mandal, J)
pkj