IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.292 OF 2002

State of Uttar Pradesh                     ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Amar Gond and Ors.                    ...Respondent(s)

With

Criminal Appeal No.1289 of 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.1650 of 2003)

O  R  D  E  R

Criminal Appeal No.292 of 2002: Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Amar Gond, Respondent No.1, is stated to have died.  The appeal against  him stands abated and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.   

So far as other accused persons are concerned, in our view, the order of  acquittal passed by the High Court against them cannot be said to be perverse in  

any  manner.   The  appeal  against  Respondent  Nos.2  to  4  fails  and  the  same is,  accordingly, dismissed.

Respondent Nos.2 to 4, who are on bail, are discharged from the liability  of bail bonds.

Crl.A. No.1289/2009 @ S.L.P. (Crl.) No.1650 of 2003: Delay condoned.

Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The appellant was convicted by the Trial Court under Section 302 of the  Indian  Penal  Code,  1860,  [hereinafter  referred  to  as  “I.P.C.”]  and sentenced to  

undergo imprisonment  for  life.   He  was  further convicted under ...2/-

- 2 -  Sections 307 and 323 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of  

seven years and six months respectively.  All the sentences, however, were ordered  to run concurrently.   On appeal  being preferred,  the  High Court  converted the  

conviction from Section 302 I.P.C. to Section 304 Part-II I.P.C. and sentenced the  appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay  

fine of  Rupees  ten thousand;  in default,  to  undergo further imprisonment for  a  period of six months.  So far as convictions under Sections 307 and 323 I.P.C. are  

concerned, the High Court set aside the same.  Hence, this appeal by special leave. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant in support of the  

appeal submitted that the appellant has remained in custody for a period of more  than six months and as the occurrence had taken place thirty two years' ago, in the  

facts and circumstances of the present case, the sentence of imprisonment awarded  against him may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.  We feel that,  

in the facts and circumstances of the present case, prayer is reasonable and must be  granted.

Accordingly,  the  appeal  is  allowed  in-part  and,  while  upholding  the  conviction of the appellant, the sentence of imprisonment awarded against him is  

reduced to the period already undergone by him. The appellant,  who is  on bail,  is  discharged from the liability  of  bail  

bonds.

......................J.             [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.             [G.S. SINGHVI]

......................J.             [H.L. DATTU]

New Delhi, July 22, 2009.