Iqbal vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1280 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 8855 OF 2018] [DIARY NO. 20227 OF 2018]

IQBAL Appellant(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

parties.

4. The appellant has been convicted under Sections

399 and 402 IPC read with Section 25 of the Arms Act,

1959 by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur in

ST No. 153 of 1984 and ST No. 154 of 1984. He was

sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of Signature Not Verified four years.

Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2018.10.13 13:15:05 IST Reason:

5. The conviction and sentence was confirmed by the

District and Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur. The 2

appellant filed a Revision before the High Court. As

per the impugned order dated 20.11.2014, the Revision

has been dismissed. It is seen from the Judgment

that none appeared on behalf of the appellant in the

High Court. The appellant has given in detail the

circumstances which led to the absence of his counsel

before the High Court.

6. Be that as it may, the incident is of the year

1980. The appellant was a young boy at that time.

Taking note of that aspect, we directed the State to

ascertain the antecedents of the appellant and his

conduct in jail. The Superintendent of District

Jail, Shahjahanpur, has reported that his conduct has

been satisfactory. In the affidavit filed on behalf

of the State, it is stated that to the best of their

inquiry, the appellant is not involved in any other

criminal case.

7. Having regard to the entire facts and

circumstances of the case, particularly taking note

of the fact that the incident is of 1980, when the

appellant was a young boy and that there is no other

criminal case against him, we are of the view that

the sentence should be limited to the period already

undergone. Ordered accordingly.

8. The appeal is allowed as above. The appellant 3

shall be released forthwith in case he is not

otherwise required to be detained in any other case.

.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]

.......................J. [ S. ABDUL NAZEER ]

New Delhi;

October 11, 2018.