$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 05^th March, 2024 + CRL.A. 307/2023 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 483/2023 LAISHRAM RANJIT SINGH MEITEI @ APIK @ MANAO @

LOYA @ TAMNGANBA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Guarav Sharma, Advocate.

versus NIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, SSP with Ms.

Asmita Sigh, Ms. Zeenat Malik, PP and Mr. Prabhat Baspow, SP for NIA. Mr. Shashank Ahuja, PP and Mr. R P Pandey, DSP for NIA.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

1. The appellant has filed present appeal under Section 375 (b) Cr.P.C.

2. The appellant and three others were arrested and charge-sheeted. The charges against all of them were ascertained vide order dated 16.11.2021. As far as, appellant is concerned, he was directed to be charged under Section 384 r/w 120B IPC, 385 r/w 120 IPC, 17, 18 & 20 the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967(“UAPA”).

3. The appellant and his co-accused had shown their inclination to plead guilty to such charges. They were duly made aware about the maximum punishment which could be inflicted upon them for the offences for which they were proposed to be charged with. They were also given time to consult Signature Not Verified CRL.A. 307/2023 1 Digitally Signed their counsel and were given time for reflection. They were, again, produced before the learned Trial Court, but they remained adamant in pleading guilty. 4. We have seen the impugned order which clearly indicates that appellant was granted sufficient time to consider his plea of guilt and after recording satisfaction that the accused had voluntarily and after due legal consultation and after being made aware about the consequences thereof, the plea of guilt was accepted and the accused was accordingly convicted.

5. The appellant has been given following sentence:-

“U/s 384 r/w 120 B IPC i. The convict is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 year, ii. A fine of Rs. 2,000/- is also imposed upon the convict. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

U/s 385 r/w 120 B IPC i. The convict is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 year, ii. A fine of Rs. 2,000/- is also imposed upon the convict. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

U/s 17 UAPA i. The convict is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 07 years, ii. A fine of Rs. 10,000/- is also imposed upon the convict. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

U/s 18 UAPA.

i. The convict is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 years, ii. A fine of Rs. 5,000/- is also imposed upon the convict. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

U/s 20 UAPA.

i. The convict is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 years, ii. A fine of Rs. 5,000/- is also imposed upon the convict. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.”

Signature Not Verified CRL.A. 307/2023 2 Digitally Signed

6. Learned counsel for the appellant, very fairly, contends that the present appeal is restricted to the quantum of sentence and the appellant would be satisfied, if some compassion is shown to him with respect to in-default sentence only.

7. It is informed by learned SPP for NIA that the appellant has already undergone 6 ½ years of substantive sentence and the learned Trial Court has already taken a lenient view.

8. Admittedly, the appellant belongs to a poor strata and his parents are also indisposed. He has two daughters and he happens to be a sole bread-earner of his family. We also cannot be unmindful of the fact that he pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity.

9. Moreover, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the a