JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The petitioner has challenged his detention in jail in pursuance of judgment and order dated 7.2.2007 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2617 of 1981. 3. The appellant was convicted by Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad, in S.T. No. 106 of 1977 under Section 307/34, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 5 years. The petitioner has challenged his conviction in this Court by way of filing Criminal Appeal No. 2617 of 1981. The said appeal was partly allowed and the petitioner was convicted under Section 324 read with 34, I.P.C. instead of Section 307, I.P.C. The petitioner was further directed to pay a fine of Rs. 7000/- within 3 months from the date of the judgment failing which he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years. 4. The petitioner failed to deposit the fine within the stipulated time. He deposited the fine after expiry of the said period. The petitioner has filed a certificate dated 1.6.2007 issued by Judicial Magistrate, Garh (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) of compliance of the order of High Court by the petitioner. On account of his default in payment of fine within stipulated time he was arrested and sent to jail. 5. The Counsel for the petitioner submits that after depositing the fine the detention of the petitioner is illegal. 6. We agree with the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that after the expiry of the period of depositing fine, if fine is deposited the imprisonment is to be terminated. 7. Section 68 of Indian Penal Code provides as under: “68. An imprisonment, which is imposed in default of payment of fine, shall terminate whenever the fine is either paid or levied by process of law.” 8. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Lakhan and others v. State, 1986 Cri. L.J. 617 in paragraph 12 held as under : “12. The cumulative examination of these provisions of law leaves no manner of doubt that in the first instance the person sentenced to pay a fine must deposit the fine forthwith, but may be permitted to deposit it after some time in the discretion of the Court. L.J. 617 in paragraph 12 held as under : “12. The cumulative examination of these provisions of law leaves no manner of doubt that in the first instance the person sentenced to pay a fine must deposit the fine forthwith, but may be permitted to deposit it after some time in the discretion of the Court. Even in that event he must deposit the amount before the period specifically fixed by the Court and if he does not do so, he immediately incurs the liability of being sent to prison. It would be the duty of the Court to arrest him and confine him into the prison. Only when such confinement in the prison has commenced that the accused can have a legal right to deposit the amount whereupon Section 68, I.P.C. would come into operation and his imprisonment would terminate.” (Emphasis supplied) 9. There is no dispute that the petitioner has already deposited the fine as directed by this Court. 10. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. We direct that the petitioner be released forthwith unless wanted in any other case. ———