9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Appeal by Local Government under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against a decision setting aside a conviction under Section 385 of the Indian Penal Code. Analysis: 1. The case involved an appeal by the Local Government against the decision of the Sessions Judge setting aside the conviction of Fazlur Rahman under Section 385 of the Indian Penal Code. The facts were clear and established beyond doubt, involving incidents where Rahman attempted to extort money from the prosecutor, Mr. H, by threatening to insult and damage his reputation. 2. Rahman, a Mukhtar, made repeated threats to various witnesses, including friends of Mr. H, indicating his intention to conduct the defense in a manner that would insult Mr. H and damage his reputation. These threats were corroborated by independent witnesses, establishing Rahman's attempt to extort money from Mr. H. 3. The Sessions Judge, while acknowledging the threats made by Rahman, acquitted him of the offense charged under Section 385, citing a mistaken interpretation of the law. The Judge failed to recognize that Rahman's threats to ask scandalous and irrelevant questions with the intent to insult and annoy Mr. H constituted an offense under Section 385 of the IPC. 4. The High Court, in its judgment, emphasized the gravity of Rahman's actions, highlighting the despicable nature of blackmail and its potential to deter witnesses and undermine the legal system. The Court, considering the serious nature of the offense and the need to protect the legal profession, imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for twelve months and a fine of &8377; 500 on Rahman, ensuring he would not practice law again. 5. Justice Stewart Macpherson concurred with the decision, supporting the imposition of the sentence on Rahman for his reprehensible conduct. The judgment underscored the importance of upholding the integrity of the legal profession and safeguarding against such misconduct in the future.
|
