High Courts(1998) 05 AHC CK 0075

Girraj Singh vs State

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 22 May 1998

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.K.Jain, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 2393 of 1980

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 407 words

P.K Jain, J.—Heard Sri P.N. Mishra, learned counsel for applicant/appellant and Sri Sayed Mahmood, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2.

By the judgment and order dated 29997, the appeal was partly allowed and the sentence awarded was modified to the extent of period of imprisonment already undergone and fine of Rs. 10,000/ and in default of payment of fine R.I. for one year. The appellant was granted one month's time to deposit the amount of fine failing which he may be arrested to serve out the sentence awarded to him. The appellant could not deposit the amount of fine within the stipulated time for reasons stated in the affidavit filed with the application for extension of time. By the present application a prayer is made to grant three weeks time to deposit the amount of fine.

3.

Learned A.G.A. contends that Section 262, Cr PC bars review or alteration of the judgment and final orders.

4.

The learned counsel for appellant contends that only extension of time has been sought through this application. This application was moved on 31st March, 1998 but it could be listed for hearing only today.

5.

For the reason stated in the affidavit I am satisfied that the appellant was prevented from depositing the amount of fine for the reasons beyond his control. While dismissing the appeal modification in the order of sentence was made on the ground that after lapse of 20 years no useful purpose will be served by sending the appellant to jail. The appellant was to serve out the sentence in default of payment of fine. Substantive sentence awarded was payment of fine and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for one year. The legal position appears to be that as soon as the appellant or the person convicted deposits the amount of fine imposed by the Court, he is entitled to be released since he would be undergoing imprisonment in lieu of default of payment of fine. Therefore, in the interest of justice, in my view, the time for deposit of fine can be extended.

6.

Therefore, extension of three weeks time for deposit of fine is allowed. The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine within three weeks from today.

7.

The office is directed to supply a certified copy of this order passed today within six days in case the appellant applies for certified copy today and pays necessary charges. Application Allowed.