A two-judge bench of the apex court on 11.10.2018 in IQBAL Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1280 OF 2018) allowed the appeal against the judgement of the High Court rejecting the revision appeal of the appellant. The bench was headed by:-
- JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
- JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER
FACTS:
The appellant had been convicted under Sections 399 and 402 IPC read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of four years.
Felling aggrieved appellant approached the district court where the conviction and sentence was confirmed by the District and Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur.
Appellant approached the High Court praying for the reversal or reduction of the sentence and filed a Revision before the High Court which was dismissed. Judgement indicated that no one appeared on behalf of the appellant in the High Court but the appellant had given the details of the circumstances which led to the absence of his counsel before the High Court.
To this he was left with last option to approach the Supreme Court praying to release him.
ISSUES:
- Whether the appellant was eligible to be released from jail?
CONTENTIONS:
By appellants:
- The incident was of the year 1980 when the appellant was a young boy at that time.
- The Superintendent of District Jail, Shahjahanpur, had reported that his conduct has been satisfactory.
- In the affidavit filed on behalf of the State, it was stated that to the best of their inquiry, the appellant was not involved in any other criminal case.
- So the appellant should be released from jail.
By respondents:
- Appellant should not be released from jail.
- Appeal should be dismissed.
OBSERVATIONS:Â The court observed that:-
- The incident is of 1980 when the appellant was a young boy.
- That there was no other criminal case against him based upon the affidavit given by the state.
- His conduct has been satisfactory according to the Superintendent of District Jail, Shahjahanpur.
HELD: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal giving the following directions:-
- The appellant shall be released if he was not required to be detained in any other case.
- The sentence should be limited to the period already undergone.
For full judgement refer: https://www.supremecourt.gov.in/supremecourt/2013/2757/2757_2013_Judgement_11-Oct-2018.pdf
