SANDIP MISHRA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER herein was convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court under Sections 279, 337 and 201 Indian Penal Code and Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act and was ordered to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months for each of the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 Indian Penal code and Section 185 of the Motor Vehicle Act. He was also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months under Section 201 Indian Penal Code and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - under each of the offences total amounting to Rs. 1000/ -, with default clause.

(2.) THE conviction and sentence was assailed by the Petitioner before the Court of Sessions in criminal appeal No. 30 -N/10/2001. Vide detailed judgment dated 25.2.2003, while conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court for the offences under Sections 201 Indian penal Code and 185 Motor Vehicles Act, was set aside but conviction under Sections 279 and 337 Indian Penal code was upheld but substantive sentence was modified to the extent that the Petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - for offences under Section 279 Indian Penal Code and under Section 337 Indian Penal Code simple imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs. 500/ - for offence under Section 337 Indian Penal Code. In the event of the default of payment of fine, Petitioner was ordered to further undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days for each default. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) SHRI Ramakant Sharma, Advocate for the Petitioner submits that there is no fault with the judgments of the Courts below with respect to the conviction of the Respondents qua the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 Indian Penal Code. But in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence even as modified by the first appellate court is harsh, he prays for leniency keeping in view his age and antecedents.