'He Has Suffered Mental Pain': Calcutta High Court Reduces Sentence For Conviction U/S 489B IPC In Appeal Pending Since 1986

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday reduced the sentence awarded to a man charged under Section 489B and Section 489C of the IPC for forging currency notes after observing that he had undergone mental agony due to long pendency of criminal proceedings. 

The appellant had been convicted only on April 13, 1986 in criminal proceedings initiated against him on December 28, 1983. Thereafter, the instant appeal preferred by him has been pending since 1986.

Justice Rabindranath Samanta noted that the appellant had already served out the sentence for one and half months and accordingly observed, 

"Owing to continuance of the appeal, the appellant/convict suffered worries, mental pains and agonies. As stated above, he has already served out the sentence for one and half months. Considering the long pendency of the criminal proceedings and the instant appeal and the mental pains suffered by the appellant/convict I feel that the sentence as imposed by the learned Trial Judge if reduced to the sentence already undergone by him would sub-serve the interest of justice."

Accordingly, the Court reduced the sentence imposed to the period already served by the appellant which is only one and half months. 

"The conviction as recorded by the learned Trial Judge in the aforesaid Sessions trial case is confirmed. However, the sentence is reduced to only one and half months which the appellant has already served out", the Court directed further. 

In the instant case, the appellant, one Biswanath Das had preferred the instant appeal against an order issued by the Sessions Court wherein he had been convicted of  for commission of offence punishable under Section 489B (Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes) and Section 489C (possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes) of the IPC  and he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.

Observations 

At the outset, the Court observed that it concurs with the order of conviction imposed by the Trial Judge. Furthermore, the Court noted that the concerned Trial Judge had taken into consideration the age of the appellant and that he was the father of a child and had hence imposed a lenient sentence. 

Pursuant to a perusal of the record, the Court noted that the appellant had already been in judicial custody for one and a half months. 

"The appellant was arrested on 28th December, 1983 and he was produced before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate on the following date i.e., 29th December, 1983. He was detained in judicial custody for the period from 29th December, 1983 to 3rd January, 1984. Thereafter, he was enlarged on bail. After the appellant was convicted and sentenced as above, he was detained in judicial custody for the period from 13th April, 1986 to 5th June, 1986. This shows that he was in judicial custody for one and half months", the Court recorded in its order. 

The Court further noted that the instant appeal has been pending since 1986. Neither the case record nor any information is received from the prosecution whether the appellant/convict is alive or not, the Court stated further. 

Furthermore, it was also recorded that despite service of administrative notice upon the appellant and several opportunities provided, no one appeared for the appellant during the hearing of the appeal. 

Accordingly, the Court disposed of the appeal by directing, 

"As the appellant has already served out the sentence, he be set at liberty forthwith."

Case Title: Biswanath Das v. State 

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 18. 

Click Here To Read/Download Order