[- 1 -] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.65 OF 1992 Nilkanth Rajaram Gavli ] Age about 20 years, residing ] at Village Paigaon, Taluka ] Bhiwandi, Dist.Thane. ]..Appellant [Ori.Accused] Vs. The State of Maharashtra ]..Respondent .... Mrs.V.R.Raje, Advocate for Mr.S.R.Chitnis, senior counsel for the Appellant Mr.P.A.Pol, A.P.P. for the State. .... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JANUARY 20,2009 DATE : JANUARY 20,2009 DATE : JANUARY 20,2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. The appellant-original accused has challenged the judgment and order dated 20th December, 1991, passed by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.304 of 1986. By the said judgment and order, the appellant has been convicted under Section 304-II of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six years and fine of Rs.1,000/- indefault to suffer R.I. for one year. [- 2 -] 2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that: . There was a dispute between accused and the deceased in respect of accounts of brick manufacturing business. On account of the said dispute, accused got enraged and there was a quarrel. Accused then started abusing the deceased. At that time, the deceased brought a stick and he came out of the shop and gave a blow with the said stick on the left hand of the accused. Thereupon the accused hit the deceased in his left armpit with a small knife and ran away. FIR came to be lodged by PW 6 Mr.Patil. After completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed. 3. After completion of the trial, the learned Judge convicted the appellant and imposed the sentence as mentioned in paragraph 1 above, hence, this appeal. 4. I have heard Mrs.V.R.Raje, the learned advocate for the appellant and Mr.P.A.Pol, the learned A.P.P. for the State. I have also perused the entire material on record. 5. Mrs.V.R.Raje on instructions, states that she is not challenging the conviction of the appellant but [- 3 -] she is only praying that the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant may be reduced. She has stated that the record clearly shows that the appellant was 20 years old at the time of incident, except this case, he has a clean record. She further submitted that incident had taken place during sudden quarrel and it occurred only because the deceased had first assaulted the appellant. Looking to these facts, the learned APP stated that he had no objection to the sentence of imprisonment being reduced, however, he stated that fine amount be increased. 6. Looking to the above facts and the fact that though the appellant has been on bail, no untoward incident has been reported since last about 18 years and the fact that the incident had occurred in the year 1985 i.e. almost 25 years ago, I am inclined to reduce the sentence of imprisonment. 7. In the result, the conviction of the appellant under Section 304-II of IPC vide judgment and order dated 20th December, 1991 passed by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.304 of 1986, is confirmed. However, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period undergone by the appellant and the fine amount of Rs.1000/- is [- 4 -] increased to Rs.5,000/-. If the earlier fine amount of Rs.1000/- is already deposited, the appellant shall pay balance fine amount of Rs.4,000/- by 30.4.2009. If the entire fine amount is not paid within the stipulated period, the appellant shall undergo in default sentence for one year R.I. 8. Appeal is partly allowed. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI.J] [- 5 -] FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.65 OF 1992 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.65 OF 1992 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.65 OF 1992 ( Nilkanth Rajaram Gavli Vs. The State of Maharashtra) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, office Court’s or Judge’s orders Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mrs.V.R.Raje Advocate for Mr.S.R. Chitnis senior counsel for Appellant Mr.P.A.Pol, A.P.P. for State CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JANUARY 20, 2009 . For the reasons mentioned separately in the judgment, the following order is passed: 1. In the result, the conviction of the appellant under Section 304-II of IPC vide judgment and order dated 20th December, 1991 passed by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.304 of 1986, is confirmed. However, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period undergone by the appellant and the fine amount of Rs.1000/- is increased to Rs.5,000/-. If the earlier fine amount of Rs.1000/- is already deposited, the appellant shall pay balance fine amount of Rs.4,000/- by 30.4.2009. If the entire fine amount is not paid within the stipulated period, the appellant shall undergo in default sentence for one year R.I. 2. Appeal is partly allowed. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]