Irom Roger case : Court sentences Ajay to 5 years rigorous imprisonment
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, January 20 2017: In a landmark judgement in the Irom Roger case, District and Sessions Judge Imphal West has sentenced Nongthombam Ajay, son of former Minister and BJP spokesperson N Biren to five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 10 lakh.The quantum of sentence was announced today in an open Court.

Earlier, the Court had kept the judgement of the case reserved and fixed today as the date for hearing of the application filed by the defence counsels of the accused convicted on January 11 wherein it pleaded the Court to release the convict under Section 370/ 361 CrPC read with 4 of the Probation Offenders Act, 1958 .

The Court had directed Probation Officer, Imphal West to submit detailed report of the convict which he complied with.

Since morning, a large number of Imphal West police personnel was deployed at Cheirap Court complex and its main entrance gate to foil any unwanted incident during the sentence hearing.

N Ajay of Luwangshangbam Mamang Leikai was produced before the Court from Sajiwa Central Jail under tight security arrangement.

The Court in its judgement stated that the accused is convicted under Section 304 Part II of Indian Penal Code for committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder which is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years or with a fine or both and also under Section 27 Arms Act, 1959 which is punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may be extended to seven years.

During the sentence hearing, counsel representing CBI contended that the accused is convicted under 304 Part II and 27 Arms Act for culpable homicide not amounting to murder of Irom Roger by shooting from his license gun.

He prayed for sentencing the accused to the maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment for committing the offence under Section 304 Part II and seven years under 27 Arms Act.

The counsel argued that there is no special reason for granting the accused the benefit of probation under Section 360/361 CrPC or under Section 4 of the Probation of Offender Act, 1958 .

In his submission, the accused's counsel A Ripchand stated that the incident happened when his client was 25 years old and the accused is currently working as a social worker with a great hope for his future.

He also stated that the marriage ceremony of the accused is scheduled in March with the bride from Thangmeiband so punishing or sentencing by imprisoning the accused shall derail his future.

The defence counsel asserted that at all the stage of the trial and proceeding of the case, the accused has been attending the Court on every date of the proceeding and there is also no previous antecedent of the accused.

Another defence counsel, Chandrajit Sharma claimed that the accused is entitled to the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation Offender Act and prayed for releasing the accused on probation.

He cited five law cases in support of his submission.

The Probation Officer in his report had mentioned that the accused convicted in the case could be reformed and rehabilitated and could be released on good conduct.

After hearing all the submissions, the Court concluded that it found no ground for releasing the accused on probation on the ground/special reason that carrying of license gun is for self defense.

On consideration of all the aggravation as well as the mitigation factors, the Court found that it will be reasonable to sentence the accused.

The Court ordered that the convict be sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs 10 lakh under Section 304 Part II and in default of payment of the fine, the accused has to undergo two years simple imprisonment.

Further the accused has also been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years and a fine of Rs 50, 000 under Section 27 Arms Act and in default the accused has to undergo simple imprisonment of six months.

The fine of 10 lakh is to be deposited within a period of six months from today.

The Court also directed District Magistrate, Imphal East to cancel the gun license issued in favour of the accused forthwith.

Comment