^ s •^^ ^" SingleBench IN THE HON'BLE^HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL N0. 5^3^ / 2008 Appellant (In Jail) ^<^1 's&^ Santosh Patel, S/o Hari RamPatel, Aged about 23 years, R/o Village - Hardadih, P.S. - Seepat Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur-(C.G.) Versus Respondent State of Chhattisgarh Through : P.S. Seepat, Distt. Bilaspur-(C.G.) CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 3'7r4 (2) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 [^-... ' / :;;''. HEGH COURT DF CHHATTISGARH AT BIL.ASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Criminal Appeal No. 736 of 2008 APPELLANT RESPONDENT VERSUS Santosh patel State of Chhattlsgarh Ku. Sangita Mishra counsel forthe appellant.'' / ; ^; % ^'^ Shri Ravindra Agrawal PL for respondent/State, "\, ^:S <l!^!^j=J^[^ALJJNjDEj^ '€RIMINALJ3ROCEDURE,,';-/.':';;.,'',^:';-;..-'^^ JUDGMENT .-.''. (07.07.2010) . •'.:'\^<.;-;.V-'^::,;:?^ This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.7.2008passed by Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC) Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 215/2007 convicting the accused/appellant under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs: 500 u/s 498-A and rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fineof Rs. 500 u/s 306 IPC plus default .sti|:julati6ns, respectively. ...: : 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 16.8,2007 me/'gintimation Ex. P-18 was lodged by the accused/appellant himself that in the interveningnight of 15/16.8.2007, his wife had committed suicide by hanging. Based on this, FIR Ex. P-19 was registered on 17.8.2007 under Section 304-B/34 IPC. Itis alleged that marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the accused/appellant in the month of March, 2004 and few months thereafter he used to torture the deceased and subject her to cruelty on account of which she committed suicide. After investigation cliallBrfcwas ffled on 12.11.2007 under sections 304-B and 498-A/34 SPC. 3. '' In ^ prove the guilt of the accused/appellanl:, prosecutiQn lias examine,d 18 witnesses. Statementof the accused/appellant was also recQrded under Section 313 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. 4. After hearing the parties and perusing the material available on record the Court below has acquitted accused hfariram of all the charges ^^•^^ .}".. -^- levelled against him. Accused/appellant herein has also been acquitted of the charge under SectJon 304-B IPC but convicted and sentenced as above. 5. Counsel for the appellant submits that she is not pressihg this appeal as faras it relates to conviction part ofthejudgment impugned and would confine her argument to the sentence part thereof only. She subrriits that as theappellant is a young man aged about 25 years, he has a small child aged two and a half years and that he is in jail since 18.8.2007, no useful purpose would be served in further keeping him in jall and it would be in the interest ofjustice if the sentence imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. This prayer of the counsel for the appellant is however opposed by the State counsel. 6. Inview of above, the appeal is partly allowed. Conviction part of the impugned judgment is maintained. However, keeping in view the fact that the appellant is a.young man aged about 25 years, he has a small child aged two and a half years and that he is in jail since 18.8.2007, sentence imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone by him and in lieu thereof the fine sentence awarded by the Court below is enhanced to Rs. 5,000 from thatof Rs. 500 for each offence. In other words, the appellant shall be liable to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000 as fine. This amount 'has t6 be deposited in the Court belowwithin a period of four months from today. F-~ailt.ire in deposit offine within the aforesaid period shall make the appellant liable for one year rigorous imprisonment. Sd/- PritinkerDiwaker Judge ^