Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Dostmahamad Rasulbhai Memon, was convicted by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Danta, in Criminal Case No.852/1995 for offences under Sections 323, 324, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. He was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. The conviction and sentence were upheld by the learned 7th Ad-Hoc Additional District and Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur, in Criminal Appeal No.13/2009 on 29.07.2011. The applicant then filed a criminal revision application under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) before the Gujarat High Court. The offence was committed in 1993, and the applicant had already undergone more than three months of imprisonment. The High Court, after hearing the parties, noted that the revisional jurisdiction is limited to correcting patent errors or perversity, and found no such error in the concurrent findings of fact. However, considering the long passage of time (the offence being from 1993), the mental agony and harassment caused to the applicant, and the fact that he had already undergone more than three months of sentence, the court reduced the sentence to three months, which had already been served. The court also noted that the fine had already been paid. The revision application was partly allowed to the extent of reducing the sentence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Revisional Jurisdiction - Section 397/401 CrPC - Scope of Interference - The revisional court can interfere only where there is a palpable error, non-compliance with law, or perverse finding of fact; it cannot substitute its own finding of fact. (Para 5) B) Criminal Law - Sentence Reduction - Mental Agony and Time Lapse - The court reduced the sentence from six months to three months (already undergone) considering the offence was committed in 1993, the accused had undergone more than three months of sentence, and the mental agony and harassment caused to the accused. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction and sentence of the applicant under Sections 323, 324, 504 IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act should be interfered with in revisional jurisdiction, and whether the sentence should be reduced.
Final Decision
The revision application is partly allowed. The conviction is upheld, but the sentence is reduced to three months' imprisonment, which the applicant has already undergone. The fine, if any, stands paid.
Law Points
- Revisional jurisdiction under Section 397/401 CrPC is limited to correcting patent errors or perversity
- not to re-appreciate evidence
- Quantum of sentence can be reduced considering mental agony and time elapsed since offence
