GOPAL DAS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petition filed by accused petitioner Gopal Das was partly allowed by this Court vide order dated September 14, 1982. His conviction under section 411 I. P. C. was maintained, but the sentence awarded to him was reduced from six months' imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-to two month's imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 800/ -. THE sentence awarded to him under section 3/25 of Indian Arms Act was reduced from six months imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- to two month's imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/ -. THE substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. THE accused petitioner was given two months' time to deposit the fine, imposed by this Court, in the trial court. THE accused-petitioner was on bail at that time. As such the trial court was directed to issue warrant of arrest and send him to jail for undergoing the sentence awarded by this Court. THE petitioner failed to deposit the fine within time allowed by this Court. As such an application u/s 482. Cr. P. C. has been filed for extending the period for depositing the amount of fine or for passing any appropriate order. Prior to the decision of Smt Saroj Devi vs. Pyarey Lal (1), it had been a practice of this Court to extend time in the cases where fine was not deposited by the defaulting accused within the time allowed by the court. THE ratio decidendi of the above noted case is that under section 362 read with section 482 Cr. P. C. only clerical and arithmetical errors, can be corrected. THE inherent powers of the Court are not contemplated by the saving provisions contained in section 362 Cr. P. C. Before a full bench of the High Court in Ajit Singh vs. State of Punjab (2), the question arose was whether the time allowed by the court for depositing the fine could be extended. THEir Lordships of the full bench after considering the pros and cons of the case came to the conclusion that time for deposit of fine cannot be extended as it would amount to review or alternation of judgment on the point of sentence which is not within the power of the court. I have no reason to differ with full bench decision of the Punjab High Court. I am bound by the law laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court and have no alternative except to reject the application dated March 4, 1983.

(2.) THE application is rejected. .