SARFARAJ @ PAPPU Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Revision is taken up in the revised call and none has put in appearance for the revisionist to assist the Court. This Court is being conscious of the fact that the Criminal Revision under Section 397 to be read with Section 401 of the CrPC cannot be dismissed for want of prosecution, hence, in the absence of the counsel for the revisionist, this Court has got no options except to proceed with to decide the revision itself on its own merit.

(2.) After having perused the records intrinsically, what is revealed is that the criminal revision, in question, arises out of an order / judgement dated 25th March 2011, as passed by the Additional Sessions Judge /2nd Fast Track Court, Haridwar in Criminal Case No. 125 of 2010, Sarfaraj v. State of Uttarakhand, by virtue of which the appellate order it has resulted into a dismissal of the appeal and consequently affirming the judgement dated 22nd September 2010, as passed by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Criminal Case No. 4281 of 2008, State v. Sarfaraz and another, convicting the revisionist for the commission of offence under Sections 392 and 411 of IPC.

(3.) Consequent to the judgements of conviction, which has been concurrently confirmed by both the Courts below, the revisionist has been directed to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- for the commission of offence under Section 392 of IPC and for the commission of offence under Section 411 of IPC, he has been directed to undergo a rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs. 5000/- has been imposed upon him. In either of the circumstances, if there is failure to comply with the said directions as given by the impugned orders of depositing the penalty, the revisionist/convict has been directed to further undergo the sentence of one month simple imprisonment.