Sikkim High Court
Crl. A./15/2021 of Binay Tamang Vs State of Sikkim on 16 June 2022
Court No.2 High Court of Sikkim Record of proceedings Page | 1 Crl.A. No.15 of 2021 Binay Tamang Appellant VERSUS State of Sikkim Respondent Date : 16-06-2022 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, JUDGE For Appellant
Virtual Court No.2
Binay Tamang
Crl.A. No.15 of 2021
Appellant
VERSUS
State of Sikkim
Respondent
Date : 16-06-2022
CORAM : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, JUDGE
For Appellant
Mr. Gulshan Lama, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel).
For Respondent
Mr. Sudesh Joshi, Public Prosecutor.
Mr. Thinlay Dorjee Bhutia, Additional Public Prosecutor.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
Rai, J.
We have heard Learned Counsel for the parties on sentence.
Learned Legal Aid Counsel for the Appellant has no fresh mitigating circumstances to put forth before this Court for considering reduction of sentence imposed by the Learned Trial Court on the Appellant. The only grounds submitted by him are that the Appellant is now forty-one years of age and should he be incarcerated for thirty long years he will be above seventy-one years old when the penalty is completed. That, he should be given an opportunity to integrate and rehabilitate into society at a younger age, after undergoing the minimum sentence of imprisonment prescribed by the provisions of law under which he was convicted. That apart, he is married and has no past criminal antecedents. He fortifies his submissions with State of Himachal Pradeshvs. Nirmala Devi: (2017) 7 SCC 262.
On the other hand, Learned Public Prosecutor submits that there is no error in the sentencing by the Learned Trial Court in view of the object and purpose of the Statutes and the provisions of law under which he has been convicted.
Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties, in the facts and circumstances placed before us, we are of the considered Page | 1
Virtual Court No.2
Record of proceedings
opinion that no fresh mitigating circumstances have been placed for reduction of the sentence imposed on the Appellant. The sentence of the Learned Trial Court is upheld.
Criminal Appeal No.15 of 2021 stands disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the Judgment and Order on Sentence be transmitted to the Learned Trial Court for information along with its records.
Judge Judge
16-06-2022 16-06-2022
ds/to
Page | 2