TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een imposed on the appellant - Held that: this is a fit case in which in default sentences imposed on the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) and 22 of The Act deserve to be reduced from one year simple imprisonment to six months' simple imprisonment each - Appeal is partly alloowed - Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 4-7-2011 - A.P. Lavande, J. Sudin Usgaonkar, Adv. appointed under Legal Aid Scheme for the Appellant C.A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the Respondent JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Ferreira, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent. 2. Since the appellant is in jail and this appeal is filed challenging only the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the fine amount of Rs.2 Lacs which has been imposed on the appellant. Mr. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant having undergone the substantive sentences imposed on him and the appellant being unable to pay the fine amounts of Rs.2 Lacs, in default sentences imposed on the appellant be reduced since the appellant is coming from poor family and is unable to pay the fine amounts. In support of his submissions, Mr. Usgaonkar placed reliance on the following judgments: (i) Shanti Lal Versus State of Maharashtra; 2008CR.L.J. 386. (ii) Unreported judgment of Delhi High Court dated 10 th February, 2011 in the case of Ramesh Kumar Versus State of Delhi. 5. On behalf of the respondent, learned Public ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact remains that the appellant claims to be from the poor family which fact has not been specifically disputed by the respondent- State. Moreover, perusal of the impugned judgment discloses that the appellant/accused was represented by Advocate appointed under Legal Aid Scheme. Moreover, the appellant has undergone substantive sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment. Therefore, having regard to the judgments referred to above relied upon by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and judgment in the case of Durand Didier (supra), I am of the considered opinion that this is a fit case in which in default sentences imposed on the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) and 22 of The Act deserve to be reduced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
