Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 562 (UTT)

HIMMAT SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

2011-09-09

SERVESH KUMAR GUPTA

body2011
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. This revision has been directed against the judgment and order of Sessions Judge, Almora dated 30.04.2003 in Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2001. In the said appeal, the judgment and order dated 18.12.2001 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Almora was affirmed. 2. The incident is of dated 23.10.1998 in remote hills of district Almora. The accused persons Har Singh, Himmat Singh and Kundan Singh were chargesheet and tried by Magistrate and after recording the evidence of the witnesses the trial ended in conviction. Every accused was sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500 under section 323 IPC; two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000 under section 325 IPC; nay one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500 under section 506 (2) IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has challenged the concurrent findings of the courts below, but now before this court, learned counsel for the revisionist pleads only mercy on the question of quantum of punishment with the request not to enter in the merits of the incident and case. 4. Needless to mention here that the Revisional Court has very limited jurisdiction against concurrent, findings and it is not supposed to analyze scrupulously the evidence recorded by the trial court and re-appreciate the evidence recorded by the trial court until there is grave and patent irregularity in the appreciation of the same. 5. Learned counsel for the revisionist urged that the revisionists are poor labourer persons and they have already been in caption for 22 days since 30.04.2003 to 22.05.2003, after their failure of the appeal in the Sessions Court so this court may reduce the sentence undergone as above with the enhancement of fine. 6. Learned AGA has also agreed with the request, as advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist taking all the circumstances into consideration. 7. This court also accepts the request, as made, to reduce the sentence of incarceration as already undergone since 30.04.2003 to 22.05.2003 i.e. for 22 days for the offences mentioned above but the fine is enhanced for the offence under Section 323 IPC from Rs. 500 to Rs. 1500/-; for the offence under section 325 IPC the fine is enhanced from Rs. 2000 to Rs. 3000/- while for the offence under section 506(2) IPC the fine is enhanced from Rs. 500 to Rs. 1500/-; for the offence under section 325 IPC the fine is enhanced from Rs. 2000 to Rs. 3000/- while for the offence under section 506(2) IPC the fine is enhanced from Rs. 500 to Rs. 1000/-. Revisionists are directed to deposit the fine within two months from today. The fine already deposited will be adjusted in this amount. In case, they do not deposit the fine, the Revision will be deemed to have been dismissed even on the score of reducing the quantum of punishment and they will serve out the entire sentences, as has been awarded by the trial court. The revision is, thus, partly allowed, as above. 8. Let the copy of this order be sent to the trial court for compliance.