MOHD. HANIF Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 124/97 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his judgment and order dated 4th June, 1998 held the appellant guilty under Section 420/379/34 IPC and vide a separate order dated 5th June, 1998 sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for offence under Section 420 IPC and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 379 IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) WITH the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State, I have gone through the record of the case as also the depositions and the judgment under challenge. Learned counsel for the appellant states that he is not in a position to challenge the order of conviction. I, Therefore, confirm the order of conviction. However, on the question of sentence, it is argued by the learned counsel that the appellant has suffered over two months actual incarceration and has been on bail since 20th August, 1998. He submits that the occurrence is of 1994 and the appellant has already suffered the ordeal of trial for more than seven years. He submits that there has been no complaint about his having belied the trust bestowed upon him by this Court. He further submits that the appellant is also not a previous convict and has by now assimilated in the mainstream of society as a useful citizen, Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in requiring him to undergo the remaining portion of his sentence at this belated stage. Learned counsel for the State has no objection if the sentence of imprisonment of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone.

(3.) WITH this modification, Criminal Appeal No. 268/1998 is disposed of.