- (1.) The appellants were tried for the offences under Sections 489A/489B/489C/489D and 420 IPC with the allegations that they were indulging in counterfeiting the currency notes and, thereafter, using them as genuine and in doing so cheating the public. Vide judgment and order dated 19.4.2003, the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track Court, Gurdaspur convicted them for the offences under Sections 489B, 489C and 420 IPC and sentenced them as below:- i) Rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each under Section 489B IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days; ii) Rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each under Section 489C IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days; and iii) Rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each under Section 420 IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the impugned judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court. He, however, states that the appeal of Manjinder Singh @ Mintuappellant has been rendered infructuous as he has already served out the entire sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him besides depositing the fine. He further states that Mangjit Singh @ Manga-appellant is facing the agony of criminal prosecution for the last more than sixteen years. He is not shown to be a previous convict. He is the only bread winner of his family. Further, out of the sentence of three years imposed upon him, he has already undergone a sentence of about six months. At present, he is on bail which concession was granted to him on 16.9.1998 and extended on 15.5.2003. Under these circumstances, no useful purpose will be served by sending the said appellant behind the bars, once again, to undergo the remaining sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him. Learned State counsel has not disputed the fact that Manjinder Singh @ Mintu-appellant has already been released from the jail after completion of the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him and depositing the fine. As regards Mangjit Singh @ Manga-appellant, it is submitted that he does not deserve any leniency in the matter of sentence of imprisonment, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. He has, however, produced the custody certificate, as per which Mangjit Singh @ Manga-appellant has already undergone an actual period of five months and nine days. The said appellant is not shown to be involved in any other case.
(3.) After taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that no useful purpose will be served by sending Mangjit Singh @ Mangaappellant behind the bars, once again, to undergo the remaining sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him. Ends of justice would be amply met if the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him on all the three counts is reduced to that already undergone by him. At the same time, the fine of Rs. 200/- imposed upon him for each of the three offences is liable to be enhanced to Rs. 1000/-.;