9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 378X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... financial crisis and his son was hospitalized suffering from Hepatitis ‘C’ awarded simple imprisonment for a period of six months with the benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. which was less than the minimum sentence of one year imprisonment prescribed. Since the petitioner had already undergone more than six months imprisonment he had not to undergo any further sentence - Decided in the favor of the appellant. - CRL.M.C. 1198/2011 - - - Dated:- 28-9-2016 - MS. MUKTA GUPTA J. Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Hiteshi Arora, Adv. Respondent Represented by: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Mr. Amish Aggarwala, Advs. MUKTA GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner was facing trial for offence under Section 135 (1)(b) of the Customs Act (in s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2010 the learned ACMM noting the special circumstances that the petitioner had faced trial for 20 years, was aged 57 years, suffering from acute financial crisis and his son was hospitalized suffering from Hepatitis C awarded simple imprisonment for a period of six months with the benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. which was less than the minimum sentence of one year imprisonment prescribed. Since the petitioner had already undergone more than six months imprisonment he had not to undergo any further sentence. 5. Aggrieved by the order on sentence, the respondent filed a revision petition before the learned Additional Sessions Judge which vide the impugned order dated 11th January, 2011 held that the plea of guilt of the petitioner was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled a third application pleading guilty. Further the learned ACMM ascertained the voluntariness from the petitioner in person. Thus the learned Additional Sessions Judge erroneously arrived at a finding that the plea of guilt arrived at by the petitioner was not voluntary. The impugned order setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 10th May, 2010 is therefore liable to be set aside. 8. The basic grievance of the respondent due to which revision was preferred before the learned ASJ was that the reasons given by the learned ACMM for awarding the sentence less than the minimum have been specifically provided to under the Act as not special and adequate reasons. Section 135(3) of the Customs Act provides as under: (3) For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not disputed by the complainant/respondent. As noted above besides the age of the petitioner the three other reasons provided by the learned ACMM to award the sentence less than the minimum cannot be said to be not adequate and special reasons. A delayed trial is always a mitigating factor in awarding sentence besides the fact that a family member especially a child or old parents or spouse is hospitalized. Even during the course of present proceedings this Court got verified the documents placed on record by the petitioner showing the illness of his son and as per the report submitted by the respondent the medical documents have been found to be genuine. 10. As noted above the learned ASJ only dealt with the aspect that the plea of guil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
