C.A.Rahim - (1.) SRI Apul Misra, holding the brief of Shri P. N. Misra, represents the revisionist. On behalf of the State SRI Jitendra Singh, A. G. A. is present. Heard both sides.
(2.) IT appears that the conviction was imposed by the learned Magistrate under Section 324, I.P.C. and sentenced him two years' R.I. on 11.10.1983. An appeal was preferred but the same was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Moradabad by order dated 17.7.1984 in Criminal Appeal No. 315 of 1983. Learned counsel has submitted that since the conviction and sentence was passed on 11.10.1983, that is about 13 years ago family position and social structure having been changed in the meantime and since there is no further report of criminality against the revisionist and in that circumstances when there is provision for imposing alternative sentence a reasonable fine be imposed. In view of the fact that the instant matter is pending for more than 12 years and considering the fact that in the Penal Code fine has been provided in the alternative, I feel that imposition of fine to the extent of Rs. 5,000 will meet the ends of justice. In that circumstance, the complainant be also compensated by making payment of 50% of the fine realised.
(3.) THE revision is, therefore, allowed in part. Conviction under Section 324, I.P.C. is affirmed. But the sentence of imprisonment substituted to a fine. He is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 within three months from this date. In default he should suffer R.I. for two years. THE fine if realised 50% be paid to the complainant after giving notice to him. With the above observations, revision is disposed of.;