JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. B.V. Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Heard Ms. Mahua Palit, the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party- State of Jharkhand.

3. The present criminal revision petition is directed against the Judgment dated 05.09.2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 30/2012 by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Land Acquisition, Hazaribag whereby and whereunder the appellate court acquitted the petitioner for offence under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code and confirmed the conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and also modified the sentence for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code by reducing it from three years Rigorous Imprisonment to two years Rigorous Imprisonment and set-aside the order imposing fine. The appellate court directed the petitioner to pay compensation of Rs.2,52,000/- under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. to the victims whose details have been mentioned in the appellate order within a period of three months clearly indicating that on account of non-deposit of the victim compensation, the trial court would recover the same in accordance with law.

4. The learned trial court, vide Judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 31.01.2012 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in G.R. No. 1628/2004, T.R. No. 654/2012, had convicted the petitioner under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and had sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 03 years for the offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Rigorous Imprisonment for 03 years for the offence under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo additional Rigorous Imprisonment for 03 months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Mr. B.V. Kumar and Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha submitted that they have taken instruction from the petitioner and the petitioner has instructed that he is ready to deposit the compensation amount as directed by the learned appellate court within a period of six months from the date of the order that may be passed by this Court. He submitted that the petitioner was only 20 years of age on the date of commission of the offence and he has remained in custody during trial for a period of 6 months 11 days and for about 15 days during the pendency of this criminal revision application and thus, the total period of custody of the petitioner is for a period of about 7 months. The learned counsel submitted that it appears that the petitioner along with the co-accused, who was declared to be a juvenile, were alleged to have committed the offence at tender age. Considering the fact that offence was committed as back as in the year 2004 and 17 years have elapsed from the date of occurrence and the petitioner has remained in custody for quite some time, some sympathetic view may be taken and the sentence may be modified to the period already undergone by him in judicial custody and appropriate direction may be issued for payment of the compensation amount to the victims of the case.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party-State, on the other hand, submitted that there are concurrent findings against the petitioner on the point of conviction under section 420 IPC and so far as the sentence is concerned, it is for the court to take an appropriate call in the matter of sentencing. It further appears from the record that the petitioner was convicted for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, but the learned appellate court acquitted the petitioner for the offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and sustained the conviction for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and also directed the petitioner to pay victim compensation amounting to Rs.2,52,000/-.

Finding