JUDGMENT AND ORDER
Pursuant to the common Judgment & Order of this Court dated 30.01.2013 passed in Criminal Appeal No. (SH)9/2009 and other criminal appeals, the respondents No. 1 & 2, namely, Shri. KM Roy and Mrs. Darilin Pyngrope appeared before this Court for sentence hearing toady.
2. The respondents in the Criminal appeal No. (SH)9/2009 had faced the trial before the Special Judge (CBI) at Shillong in Special (CBI) case No. 2 of 2001 along with the appellants of the Criminal Appeal No. (SH)1/2009, Criminal Appeal No. (SH)4/2009 and Criminal Appeal No. (SH)5/2009. The learned Special Judge (CBI) at Shillong by the judgment and order dated 30.04.2009 had convicted the appellants of Criminal Appeal No. (SH)1/2009, Criminal Appeal No. (SH)4/2009 and Criminal Appeal No. 5/2009 for the offence punishable under Section 120B of the IPC r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short “the P.C Act).
3. The learned Special Judge under the order of sentence dated 11.05.2009, awarded the sentence for two years and Rs. 30,000/- only fine and in default of fine another six months under Section 13(2) of the P.C Act and sentence for another six months under Section 120B of the IPC and both the sentences will run concurrently to the appellants of the Criminal appeal No. (SH)1/2009, Criminal Appeal No. (SH)4/2009 and Criminal Appeal No. (SH)5/2009.
4. By the said common judgment and order dated 30.01.2013, this Court allowed the appeal i.e Criminal Appeal No. (SH)9/2009 filed by the CBI i.e Superintendent of Police, CBI/Anti Corruption Bureau, Shillong against the order of the learned Special Judge (CBI) Shillong dated 30.04.2009 for acquitting the two accused persons (respondents), namely, Shri. KM Roy and Mrs. Darilin Pyngrope.
5. Mr. MF Quershi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has strongly contended that since the respondent No. 1 (Shri. KM Roy) is a very aged person and the respondent No. 2 (Mrs. Darilin Pyngrope) is suffering from several illness, they should be awarded lesser sentence.
6. Under Section 13(2) of the P.C Act, punishment would be imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than one year but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
7. Section 120B of the IPC consists of two parts i.e under (1) and Clause (2) Under Clause (1) of Section 120B, punishment for conspiracy for the offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where not express provision is made in code (IPC) for punishment of such a conspiracy, shall be in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence.
8. In the present case, the offence committed by the respondents is the offence under Section 13(2) of the P.C Act which provides punishment with imprisonment for a term not less than one year but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. The present case is covered by Section 120B (1) of the IPC. The learned Special Judge had awarded the sentence of two years and fine of Rs. 30,000/- each for the offence under Section 13(2) of the P.C Act to the appellants of Criminal Appeal No. (SH)1/2009, Criminal Appeal No. (SH)4/2009 and Criminal Appeal No. (SH)5/2009. As stated above, the above appellants convicted by the Special Judge had faced the same trial with the present respondents i.e respondent No. 1 & respondent No. 2 of Criminal Appeal No. (SH)9/2009.
9. On considering, the terms of sentence awarded by the learned Special Judge (CBI) Shillong in the case of other accused persons, who faced the same trial with the present respondents and also the age of the respondent No. 1 (Shri. KM Roy) and also the physical condition of the respondent No. 2 (Mrs. Darilin Pyngrope), this Court award the sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment and fine Rs. 30,000/- each and in default of fine another six months for rigorous imprisonment under Section 13(2) of the P.C Act and sentence for another six months under Section 120B of the IPC and both the sentences will run concurrently.
10. The respondent No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 shall surrender before the Special Judge, Shillong to serve the sentence within one week from today. In other words, they should surrender on or before 09.04.2013
11. With the above observations and directions, this criminal misc. case stands disposed of.
12. The Registry is directed to furnish a copy of this order to the learned Special Judge (CBI), Shillong forthwith.