Protracted Trial No Ground For Reducing Sentence: J&K HC

J&K High Court | File Photo

Upholds 7 Years Jail, Rs 1 Lakh Fine On Pulwama Man Regarding Students Death In 2011 

By M Ahmad

Srinagar- Observing that mere protraction in trial or delay in decision of the appeal cannot be a ground for reducing the sentence, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh has upheld punishment of seven years and fine of Rs one lakh awarded to a man from Pulwama for “culpable homicide not amounting to murder”.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar made the observation while dismissing an appeal against verdict by Principal Sessions Judge Pulwama on 9 May 2015, by virtue of which appellant, Nazir Ahmad Ganie, was convicted of offence under Section 304 Part-II of RPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) while other two accused, namely, Ghulam Ganaie and Maqbool Ganaie, were convicted of offence under Section 323 of RPC (voluntarily causing hurt) in connection with the death of a student, Danish Farooq alias Umar Farooq, 16 August 2011, due to attack with clubs. Charge for offence under Section 302 RPC (murder) was not established against the accused.

After hearing the counsel for Nazir Ahmad Ganie and government advocate, the court responded in negative to the only question that it said was required to be determined in this appeal if there is any scope for interference in the quantum of sentence awarded by trial court against the appellant.

“Coming to the facts of the instant case, the appellant has been convicted of causing death of a young student who must have been the only hope of his parents. A bright future was waiting in wings for the deceased but his life was cut short due to the act committed by the appellant, thereby leaving the parents of the young boy weeping and wailing for the rest of their lives,” the court said, adding, “Appellant is a mature person, therefore, even if there would have been strong reasons for him to attack the deceased, still then, having regard to the young age of the deceased, he should have desisted from giving a fatal blow to the deceased.”

The circumstances in which the crime has been committed by the appellant, the court said, do not warrant much leniency in the matter of imposing sentence upon him. “The learned trial court has been considerate enough in not awarding maximum punishment to the appellant and instead imprisonment of only seven years has been awarded against him,” the court said as it rejected contention by Nazir’s counsel that the occurrence has taken place more than 11 years back and the appellant has faced trial for about four years and the present appeal was pending for the last more than six years. The counsel had argued that these factors constitute good enough ground to reduce the sentence imposed upon the appellant.

“From the analysis of law, it is clear that mere protraction in trial or delay in decision of the appeal cannot be a ground for reducing the sentence, particularly when during the pendency of the appeal, the appellant has been admitted to interim bail in terms of order dated 08.11.2016 and he continues to be on bail as on today,” the court said and directed the appellant to surrender before the trial court within a period of fifteen days for serving the balance sentence.

Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now

Be Part of Quality Journalism

Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast.



Comments are closed.