Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

HARBANS LAL, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment/ order of sentence dated 28.3.1998 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, whereby he convicted and sentenced Gauri Shankar to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of the same, to further undergo imprisonment for six months under Section 392 of IPC.

The factual matrix is that Baljeet Kumar made statement before SI Gurcharan Singh in the terms that he is a sweetmeat vendor in Sonepat Town. His children had gone to the school as usual at 7.30 A.M. On that day, i.e., 26.7.1995, he too was away to his business at Amritsari Sweet Corner, Model Town, Sonepat at 8:00 A.M whilst his wife Neelam was at home. Around 11:00 A.M., he arrived in the street leading to his house to pick up money for onward payments. He heard shrieks of his wife calling for help. He noticed Raju Halwai and two other young boys emerging out of the aforesaid street. He was in a position to identify all the three persons. On sensing a foul play, he rushed to his house and found his wife lying in injured condition with her both hands tied with a "Dupatta" (headgear). Her right elbow was bleeding. She narrated that the three young boys had attacked her and had relieved her of her gold bangles, ear rings, nose pin, gold chain and cash amount worth Rs.39,500/-. He chased those boys. His neighbour Sham son of Mewa Ram Khatri and Vijay Chhabra son of Ramesh Chander Chhabra also chased to nab the culprits, who ran into the house of Parkash Sansi situated in the Pappu Kabari wali gali. The wife of Parkash was got engaged in bolting the door from inside. He (Baljeet Kumar and aforesaid persons, namely, Sham and Vijay Chhabra) forced their entry in the house of Parkash Sansi. Raju and his guys escaped by jumping into the bazaar. They all three were identified by Baljeet Kumar and his companions. The case was registered on the basis of his statement. Later on, the offence under Section 216-A of IPC was added against the accused Santosh and Parkash, who were arrested on 28.7.1995. The accused Raju and Gauri Shankar were also put under arrest on 15.8.1995. The third one was identified as Mahesh, whose presence could not be procured on completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was laid in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial of the accused.

As a sequel of the above discussion, the conviction is maintained. At this juncture, Mr. Vats made a submission that the sentence may be reduced. I have pondered over this submission. The occurrence took place wayback in the year 1995, meaning thereby, this incidence is more than 13 years old. The accused- appellant has been facing the agony of trial since then. So taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, the substantive sentence is reduced from three years to one year, while maintaining the fine as well as its default clause. With this modification in the order of sentence, this appeal fails and is dismissed. The Registry is directed to transmit a certified copy of this judgment to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat for taking necessary steps to send the appellant to the prison to serve the remaining part of his sentence.