Back
DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
Ramswaroop – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J. - This revision has been filed by the petitioners against the judgment dated 12.10.2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sheopur, in Criminal Appeal No.60/2008 affirming the judgment dated 27.8.2008 passed by JMFC, Vijaypur, in Criminal Case No.242/2006 convicting the petitioners under Section 323/34 of IPC and sentencing them to suffer 2 month RI with fine of Rs.300/-.
2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this revision are that on 25.8.2006 petitioners committed Marpeet with complainant Ramdayal. Crime was registered. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. Trial was conducted. After trial, petitioners have been convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid, petitioners preferred appeal which was dismissed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners/accused submitted that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the petitioners for the aforesaid offence. As regards sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that incident took place on 25.8.2006 and more than 16 years have elapsed. They have already suffered incarceration for about 1 day. Therefore, while enhancing the fine amount suitably,
The court has the discretion to consider the time elapsed since the incident and adjust the sentence accordingly, while also providing for compensation to the victim under Section 357 of Cr.P.C.
The court can reduce the sentence to the period already served, considering the time spent in custody and the mental trauma of a protracted trial.
The court has the discretion to reduce a sentence considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the lack of criminal antecedents and the absence of misuse of bail.
The court has the discretion to consider the time already undergone and the mental agony of protracted trial in reducing the sentence of the accused.
The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to the time already served, emphasizing justice must consider the accused's circumstances and hardships.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 379 IPC but reduced the sentence to the period already served, considering the time spent in custody and the circumstances of the case.
The court may reduce a sentence based on the time already served and the circumstances surrounding the case, even when the conviction is upheld.
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
