BANNA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr.PC is directed against the order of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Neem -ka -Thana, dated July 24, 1986.

(2.) THE petitioner was convicted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate vide his order, dated February 2, 1984, for offence under Section 54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act and sentenced to six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/ - and in default of payment of fine he was directed to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment. This judgment was challenged in appeal before the Sessions Judge, Sikar who partly allowed the appeal vide his judgment, dated May, 12, 1986, maintained the conviction and altered the sentence. He reduced the substantive sentence of imprisonment to one already undergone and enhanced the fine to a sum of Rs. 1,000/ -. He gave one month's time for depositing the amount else he was to undergo sentence passed by the trial court. The petitioner went to deposit the fine on July 9, 1986, obviously after one month and the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate refused to deposit the same, as according to him the time granted had expired and the accused was liable to undergo sentence passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sikar. He ordered for issuance of warrants of arrest against the accused and further directed that warrants be sent for execution to Ram Prakash, Station House Officer, by name. Thereafter the petitioner approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Neem -ka -Thana, who, vide his order, dated July 15, 1986, directed that the petitioner may not be detained in jail provided he deposits the fine within a period of one week. On July 19, 1986, the petitioner moved an application before Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Neem -ka -Thana expressing his desire to deposit the fine on that very day but the application was deferred for July 24, 1986 without assigning any reason except msntioning that accused is not present in person. On July 24, 1986 the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate passed the impugned order; where in he mentioned that the accused has been produced before the court duly arrested who was given six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/ - on February 2, 1984 by that court and thereafter according to him as per orders of the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar, dated May 2, 1986 he was to prepare a warrant for custody of accused in jail mentioning that the benefit of Section 428 Cr.PC may be given to the accused. He accordingly forwarded the accused to jail for serving out six months' simple imprisonment. He further observed that accused has also not deposited a fine of Rs. 200/ - hence endorsement be put that he should serve out the sentence in lieu of fine also.

(3.) SECTION 68, IPC reads as under: Section 68 - The imprisonment which is imposed in default of payment of a fine shall terminate whenever that fine is either paid or levied by process of law.