CF0000061019 agaii? 6<s»ti-riE!aiwl r IN THE HIGH .COURT OFMAQHYA rR^IESH AT JAB.;U..PIR '\ CRIMNAL APPEAL N0 19: '1996 c:^ APPiSLLAMIS; • 1. ^ Raju e lias-'Sakra allas A Sw"~3a.^ A ",» .-J»^' •^-•-^l^s- c >'"-,Wi-'"' \.'" ^w ^:y ^o "' Agrasendas' s/o Ghhabil Satnanii aged 19 yearsy'"" Dhanush sbn of Mohan Satnami, 22 years, /•' • residoits of Amera, Kakari •t- 73 ~ "! -^ f f^we~ f ^im\ :.•"' 'j.s'u'c® y-Lxs.spu.s' \,ya)),: >.< vsasus s- R3SPQNDEt}T; state o£ Mad'nya Pradssh g££^^_APFEALUirDBR SECT ].ON 3 ^4 ( 2} ,0i'_ _THE, _CQDE_OF ..a XI-HC-22 ~T3 -^inwi-. ®nl'y<i,s,fsidi'yy -r HW<fl SbNra) .C^.^Mfl.>9i^li99^ 200 Isre^i' SD^I^T R-<i°b 3n^i ?ti+ilcn ^feti an^i ^RiiWHfOT -OS-2006 •*Wtcl<l)-1 •RTR^Tt' •?-fsvt tfsRSR ^ arfigiT 31)^1 Shri Abhay Tiwori, learned counsel for.the appellont Rajd. Appellant Dhgnush is absent. Shri Adiish Shukla, 6ovt. Advocate for the State. Shri Ashish Shukla, learned ©ovt.fAdvocate subtnits that after rificotion from the Central Jail, Bila^pur, it has been found that petlant Dhanush has been releosed on 1EJ-04-2005 upon 9rontof special prieve. Sinceneither the applicant DFianu^h has appetn'ed todoy nor any spresentation wcs made on his behalf dn n^ade by the learned 6ovt. Advocote,the ismissed for non-prosecution. So far as the appellant Rcyu is cor| Amits that he would also be released >ecial reprieve of 36 fflonths&28day iuperintendent, Central Jail, Bilaspur is fl :! olso in view of the submission ippeal preferred by bhanush is cerned, learned &ovt. Advocate on 12-08-2006 upon gront of s. A letter received from the led. ' ! ' Shri Abhay Tiwari, leqrned coun^el for the appellant &hanush •ays that he would presshis appeal onty |on the question of sentence dnd not on merits. In view Of the submission, the a((peal of Rcyu © Sakra is heard finally today only ori the question of sente^ice. Shri Abhay Tiiwori, learned cour^ .irged that the appellont Rcyu was agedoi^ sel for the appellant Raju has ly about 22 years onthe dafe of XI-HC-22 F T^ -i|l'4lcl4, ^Til-y'ld, fawi'yy *<1*<WI WNR) _..&..^;.fAo,.9^Z.Oi3^ J^—---------f^ 200 feS^ST' sii^r^iT h-u^ sfS^s ^HNi +4l?fl 3ll?<! S«]IW^fl? •L. st)t*fi^l<lll 'RTRcTf "^^^ Tf^R3TC ^ aipgq.aii^r :currerice and is'a first offender. It ijfas contended that the golden tohar alleged to hove been looted from }rom ctppellant Rcyu. In view of the sen1 Ippellant Raiju © Sakra and olso in view [pecial reprieve, co-accused Ohanush h< Fentral Jail. Bilaspur on 18-04-2005, it| Mukhni Bai was not recpvered ence already undergone by the |)f the fact that upon grant of Is already been releosed from was prayed that the sentence ^warded to the appeilant Rqju be rec|uced to the sentence already Wergoneby him. On the other hand, Shri Ashish Sl^ukta, learned 6ovt. Advocate has ipposedtheprayer. ' Having considered the rival subniiqsions, I have perused the record. le appellant Rcyu was 09ed aholit 22 ind was thus a youthful offender. N< igainst the appellant. fiolden Mohar alle^ jperson of Mukhni Boi was also not recove^-ed from the appellont Rcyu.The ippeltant has already suffered incaFcer 1995 ond 13-04-1996 toQl-09-1999 and jition from 11-08-1995 to 04-09- [t-hereafter 28-02-2006 till date. Co-accused Dhanush has already been r^eased from Centraljsil, Bitaspur on 15-04-2005 upon gran'f of special repf interest of justice woulrf be served i} appellant Reu'u © Sakra is reduced to tl| him. [eprs pn the date of occurrence previoiis conviction is: dlleged ed to have been looted from the ieve. In this view of the matter, the sentence awarded to the ! sentence already undergone by [ltf^^f^ T Xl-HC-22 7 ,A 'rer •^wiw^, wnww, hmwy. *<1»<CTI ai<flqi .^...^N0^25: ^L '200 fS«x{si' SII^T^iT l^<cb sn9^i ai'qBi'^fttf Tiimane In the resylt, this appeal i; appelfant Rqju © Sakra under Sectio; the sentence awarded to the appell' sentence already undergone by him. •*wfrl''<l-f tniRtf •? 1^3t ^TRH ^'a:rf:(ra gii^i partly allowed. Conviction of the i-397 of IPC is maintained. Howeyer, nt Rcyu @ Sakra is reduced to the Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge J^. •A^fi ^ .200 "p 1