Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mahabir vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 27 January, 2015
Bench: Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, Abhay Manohar Sapre
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.185 OF 2015
(ARISING OUT OF SLP(CRL.) NO.8254/2014)
MAHABIR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondent.
We confine this appeal to the question of sentence alone. Altogether four accused were involved and all of them were convicted for offence under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC. A perusal of the judgment of the Trial Court as well as that of the High Court disclose that the victim was assaulted by A2 to A4, on the exhortation applied by A1, with rods and dandas and thereby caused multiple abrasion and also other injuries in the left leg, right ankle joint, knee joint, right dorsum of hands with swelling as well as with restriction. They were inflicted with punishment Signature Not Verifiedof rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years along Digitally signed by Narendra Prasad Date: 2015.02.03 11:10:56 IST Reason: with fine amount of Rs.15,000/- each. The High Court, taking into account the age of the A1-who was 75 years 1 old, thought it fit to confirm the conviction but released him on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act by simultaneously enhancing the compensation to Rs.1 Lac to be paid to the victim. As far as appellant/A3, with whom we are now concerned, there was equal participation along with A2 and A4. What we notice is that there was a property dispute as between the appellants on the one hand and the victim on the other hand, with the owner of the property who stated to have expressed his inability to handover possession despite receiving advance payment. A civil litigation is also stated to be pending between the parties. It is also pleaded that the appellant is running a travel service in Delhi and his wife is mentally retarded. He is at the age of 46 years and is already undergone imprisonment for six months. The material papers do not disclose involvement in any other criminal case.
Taking into account the nature of occurrence in which the victim stated to have suffered the injuries at the instance of the accused and also his status as an owner of a travels and the condition of his wife and his obligation to maintain two minor children and the issue which prompted the appellant to assault the victim along with other accused as well as the nature of injuries sustained by the victim, the period of sentence already undergone by the appellant can be held 2 to be sufficient, while simultaneously increasing the fine amount and thereby provide a higher compensation to be payable to the victim. With that view, while confirming the conviction imposed on the appellant, taking into account the peculiar facts involved relating to the appellant, we hold that the sentence already undergone by the appellant would be sufficient and the compensation as the fine amount is enhanced from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.1 Lac, which shall be payable to the victim. The appellant shall deposit the said fine amount of Rs.1 Lac with the Trial Court within two months from today. On such deposit being made in the Trial Court, the same shall be disbursed to the victim towards compensation. If the appellant fails to deposit the compensation within the time limit, the benefit granted under this order will automatically cease to operate and the appellant should suffer the remaining sentence imposed upon him by the Courts below. The fine amount imposed by the Court below, if already paid, shall be given credit to while depositing the enhanced amount. Subject to above, the appellant shall be released forthwith if his detention is not required in any other case.
Taking into account the role played by A4, his special leave petition as against the judgment was already dismissed on 25.8.2014.
3 The appeal stands disposed of.
................................J. [FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA] ................................J. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE] NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 27, 2015.
4
ITEM NO.47 COURT NO.8 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8254/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/05/2014 in CRLA No. 676/2012 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi) MAHABIR Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 27/01/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.H. Parekh,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Suchit Mohanty,Adv.
Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. P.K. Dey,Adv.
Ms. Rashmi Malhotra,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (SHARDA KAPOOR)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file) 5