Dear Professional Collegues,
Need your expert opinion on the following:
In one of the Section 353 IPC, case the following judgement delivered by the 1st Class Magistrate Court in kalyan.
Accused convicted under section 353 of IPC and accused is first time offender
The case is 22 years old and linency was pleased after judgement. Court having considered the case as old and the accused being only bread winner of the family and being first time offender, Court considered that imprisonment should not be given and fine should be imposed and delivered judgment as under:
a> Accused convicted under section 353 of IPC
B) Accused to pay a fine of Rs.20000/- in default to suffer RI of 3 months
c) fine amount to be distributed to informat in the case u/s 357 of IPC after appeal period is over.
D) Bail bonds to be cancelled
MY QUESTIONS ARE;
1. This being a conviction case, whether PP will go for appealing against the above order in Sessions court asking for enhancement of imprisonment from 3 months to more period
2. Whether Session court can enhane the improson period??
3. In this case since the accused has paid the fine of Rs.20000/- and obtained official receipt from court, whether session court can incrase the fine from Rs.20000 to mroe amount or it can order for only imprisonment
4. If above is the case, what is the defese to the accused
5. Generally when there is conviction , still the PP ;will go for appeal for enhancement of punishment.
6. Whehter in appeal defence, the accused can please whether the erroneous judgement was given by Magistrate??
7. what other defeses the accuses has when if at all appeal filed by PP
Kindly enlighten on the above as ap.Your early reply will be highly appreciated. If you need any clarification I will be glad to provide.
S.S.NARAYANA