Himachal Pradesh High Court
Manoj Kumar vs . State Of Hp on 16 January, 2025
Cr. Appeal No.58 of 2025
16.01.2025 Present: Mr. Mukesh Sharma and Rajeev Sharma,
Advocates, for the appellant.
Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Addl.
Advocates General, for the respondent/State.
Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Addl.
Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on
behalf of the respondent.
Admit.
Records be called for.
List for hearing in due course.
Cr. MP No.333 of 2025
The applicant-appellant has preferred the
present appeal against the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 11.12.2024, passed by the learned
Special Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, HP in case No.1
of 2022, titled State of HP Versus Manoj Kumar & Anr.. The
appeal filed raises arguable points. The applicant-appellant
has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
a period of three year and a fine of Rs.20,000/- for an
offence punishable under section 354(D)(1)(i) and in
default of payment of fine, he has to further undergo SI for
six months and SI for a period of 1 year and to pay a fine
of Rs.5,000/- under Section 506 of IPC and in default
thereof, he has to further undergo simple imprisonment for
three months. The applicant/appellant during the trial was
enlarged on bail. He has not misused the liberty accorded
to him during the said period.
The sentence imposed, in the case at hand, is
fixed term sentence. In this respect it would be appropriate
to refer to judgment dated 05.07.2024 passed in
SLP(Criminal) Diary No.27298/2024, titled Bhupatji
Sartajji Jabraji Thakor Vs. The State of Gujarat. The
relevant extract is being reproduced hereinbelow:-
“There is a fine distinction between a
sentence imposed by the trial court for a
fixed term and sentence life
imprisonment. If a sentence is for a fixed
term, ordinarily, the appellate court may
exercise its discretion to suspend the
operation of the same liberally unless
there are any exceptional circumstances
emerging from the record to decline.
However, when it is a case of life
imprisonment, the only legal test which
the Court should apply is to ascertain
whether there is anything palpable or
apparent on the face of the record on the
basis of which the court can come to the
conclusion that the conviction is not
sustainable in law and that the convict has
very fair chances of succeeding in his
appeal. For applying such test, it is also
not permissible for the court to undertake
the exercise of re-appreciating the
evidence. The emphasis is on the word
“palpable” and the expression “apparent
on the face of the record”.
Perused the record, there are no exceptional
circumstances emerging thereof necessitating declining of
relief as is being sought. Since the matter is admitted for
hearing, listing of the same is going to take some time,
therefore, the sentence in the case at hand, is ordered to
be suspended, subject to the applicant depositing the
entire fine amount, if not already deposited, before the trial
Court within four weeks from today and also subject to his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with
one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Court, undertaking therein that petitioner will
attend this Court as and when required and in case of
dismissal of the appeal, he will immediately surrender
before the learned Court to receive the sentence.
A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial
Court with the direction that the report of compliance of
this order be submitted to this Court within a period of six
weeks. The application stands disposed of.
(Bipin C. Negi)
Vacation Judge
16th January, 2025
(Gaurav Rawat)
[ad_1]
Source link