Back
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Jarnail Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Judgment
Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, J.
The instant appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction dated 01.07.2022 and order of sentence dated 02.07.2022 passed by Special Judge (Electricity) Kaithal, whereby the appellant has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 years and 10 months alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months for commission of offence under Sections 136(2) of Electricity Act, 2003.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant confines his prayer to the quantum of sentence and submits that FIR in the present case was registered on 01.06.2019 and as such the appellant has faced the agony of trial for a considerable period. Assertion is that the appellant has already undergone the actual sentence of 2 years, 10 months and 15 days out of 3 years and 10 months SI awarded to him, therefore, prays for leniency by reducing the sentence to the period already undergone by him.
3. Here it would be pertinent to mention that the appellant did not challenge his conviction on merits and only confines his relief qua quantum of sentence. This Court has also sc
The Court considered mitigating circumstances, including the appellant's family responsibilities and the prolonged trial period, in reducing the appellant's sentence.
The court established that mitigating circumstances can justify a reduction in sentence even when the conviction is upheld.
The court maintained the conviction under the Electricity Act but reduced the sentence to the period already served due to mitigating circumstances.
The court must consider the age, prior conduct, and circumstances of the convicted when determining an appropriate sentence, particularly for first-time offenders.
The court found that considerations of time served and rehabilitation justified the modification of the sentence in favor of the appellants.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioners while maintaining the amount of fine, considering ....
The court can reduce a sentence to the time already served when considering prolonged trials and the age of the petitioner, while upholding the conviction.
The court has the discretion to reduce the sentence based on the period already served by the appellant.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
