Reduction of sentence to period undergone for Sections 324 and 326 IPC based on custody duration and lack of criminal antecedents.

On October 3, 2020, the appellant assaulted Basant Soni and Lallu Soni with an iron object following a verbal altercation involving abusive language and death threats

The appellant was arrested on January 21, 2021

Following a trial, the First Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, convicted the appellant under Sections 294, 506-B, 324, and 326 of the IPC, sentencing him to a maximum of 6 years of imprisonment

The appellant challenged this judgment before the High Court, though his counsel specifically limited the prayer to a reduction of the sentence rather than challenging the conviction itself

1. Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 294, 506-B, 324, and 326 of the IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record

2. Whether the sentence of 6 years for the offense under Section 326 IPC is excessive and warrants reduction to the period already undergone by the appellant

The Court applied the penal provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), specifically Section 294 (obscene acts/songs), Section 506 (criminal intimidation), Section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons), and Section 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons)

Procedurally, the appeal was governed by Section 415(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

The court balanced the gravity of the offense against sentencing principles, including the lack of criminal antecedents and the duration of pre-trial and post-conviction detention

The Court affirmed the conviction by finding that the testimonies of the victims and witnesses (PW-2, PW-3, and PW-4) were consistent and corroborated by medical evidence

In analyzing the quantum of the sentence, the Court noted that the appellant had already served over 5 years, 3 months, and 13 days in custody

The Court took into account mitigating factors, including that the appellant is a "stick villager" with no prior criminal record

Applying the principle of proportionality, the Court determined that the ends of justice would be met by reducing the sentence to approximately 4 years and 8 months, which effectively constituted the period already served, while maintaining the fine and default sentences

The Court reduced the substantive jail sentence for the Section 326 offense to 4 years and 8 months (period already undergone)

The fine and default imprisonment terms remained affirmed

Consequently, the Court directed the immediate release of the appellant, provided he was not required in any other matter