Baban v. State of Maharashtra

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.882 OF 2007
Baban ...Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Maharashtra ...Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The appellant, along with two other accused persons, was convicted under
Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code [for short, ‘I.P.C.’] and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine
of Rs.1,000/- each; in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six
months. They were further convicted under Section 498A I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-
each; in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. Both
the sentences, however, ordered to run concurrently. On appeal being preferred, the
High Court upheld the convictions, but reduced the sentence of imprisonment of the
other two accused persons to the period already undergone; whereas did not make
any alteration in the sentence so far the appellant is concerned. Hence, this appeal by
special leave in which notice has been issued on the question of sentence only.
....2/-
-2-
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the
appellant has remained in custody for a period of about two years. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met if the
sentence of imprisonment awarded against this appellant is reduced to the period
already undergone.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in-part and while upholding the
conviction of the appellant, sentences of imprisonment awarded against him are
reduced to the period already undergone. The appellant, who is in custody, is
directed to be released forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case.
...................
...J.
[B.N. AGRAWAL]
[G.S. SINGHVI]
New Delhi,
May 08, 2008.