Ajay Kumar Pandit v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.1122 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2016 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ajay Kumar Pandit S/o Paras Pandit @ Paras Nath Prasad, R/o Matiyariya Tola Pipra, PS.- Harsidhi, Distt.- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

State Of Bihar and Anr.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhannjay Kumar No 2 For the O.P. No.2 :

Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 15-02-2024 Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and on careful perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the learned S.D.J.M. East Champaran, Motihari on 6th February, 2018 in Complaint Case No. 160 of 2016, Tr. No. 1459 of 2018 convicting and sentencing the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 2 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for 2 months under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and fine of Rs. 6,000/-, in default simple imprisonment for 1 month. The said order of conviction and sentence was affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 13th Court, East Champaran at Motihari in Criminal

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1122 of 2018(8) dt.15-02-2024 2/3 Appeal No. 9 of 2018. This laid the petitioner to file the instant Revision.

2. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner without going into the merit of the instant Revision that the petitioner being the husband of the complainant has suffered incarceration for a period of 1 year, 6 months and 8 days during trial and Appeal. Considering the period of custody, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has prayed for reducing the sentence of imprisonment and pass an order lating of the petitioner from the rigorous of further imprisonment.

3. I have heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner as well as the respondent.

4. The period of imprisonment under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code be reduced to 1 year and 6 months against the petitioner. Period of imprisonment for the offence under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act shall remain the same. The substantive sentence of imprisonment shall run concurrently.

5. In view of being in judicial custody for such long time, sentence of payment of fine be recalled.

6. The period of incarceration by the petitioner be set up against the actual punishment for imprisonment.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1122 of 2018(8) dt.15-02-2024 3/3

7. The parties are at liberty to act on the server copy of the order.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J) Guddu/- U T