Imprisonment reduced to time served after prolonged proceedings, with the fine enhanced.

During 1998–99, the petitioner was employed as a Committee Servant at Seva Sahakari Sanstha, Bamra.

An audit found that fertilizer-sale proceeds and amounts relating to gunny bags, totalling approximately Rs.1,83,369.25, had not been deposited.

Following investigation, the petitioner was charged and convicted under Section 409 read with Section 34 of the IPC; the Trial Court sentenced him to three years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000.

The appellate court affirmed the conviction and sentence.

In revision, the petitioner, aged 72, did not challenge his conviction but sought reduction of his sentence to the period already undergone, relying on the age of the case, his time in custody, and his conduct while on bail.

Whether the petitioner’s custodial sentence should be reduced to the period already undergone, with an enhancement of the fine.

Whether the conviction under Section 409 read with Section 34 of the IPC should be disturbed, where the petitioner expressly did not challenge it.

The revision was brought under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The conviction was under Section 409 read with Section 34 of the IPC, and the Court considered whether the sentence warranted modification in light of the circumstances presented.

The Court invoked the ends of justice in determining whether imprisonment could be reduced while increasing the fine; it cited no precedent.

The Court left the conviction undisturbed because the petitioner did not seek to challenge it.

On sentence, it considered that the incident dated back to 2001, the petitioner had remained on bail since 2010, no offence was reported against him during that period, and he had already undergone part of his sentence.

In those circumstances, it concluded that the ends of justice would be met by reducing imprisonment to the period already undergone and enhancing the fine.

It enhanced the fine from Rs.2,000 to Rs.5,000, payable within two months; the fine already deposited was to be credited toward that amount.

In default, the petitioner would be liable to undergo the sentence imposed by the lower courts.

His bail and surety bonds were discharged, and the revision was disposed of.