Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Babu Ram And Anr vs State on 6 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 338/1993
Babu Ram And Anr.
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jagmal Singh Choudhary, Senior
Advocate assisted by
Mr. Pradeep Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
06/04/2022
1. In the wake of instant surge in COVID - 19 cases and spread
of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being
maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety
of all concerned.
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1989 and the present criminal appeal is pending since the year
1993.
3. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been
preferred against the judgment dated 19.08.1993 passed by
learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases,
Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.26/92, whereby appellant No.1-Babu
Ram was convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC and was
sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment,
alongwith fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to
undergo further two and a half months rigorous imprisonment;
(Downloaded on 08/04/2022 at 08:28:29 PM)
(2 of 4) [CRLA-338/1993]
fine of Rs. 200/- for the offence under Section 447 IPC, in default,
to undergo one month's simple imprisonment and; for the offence
under Section 4/25 was sentenced to undergo one year simple
imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.250, in default of payment of
fine to undergo further one and a half months simple
imprisonment. Appellant No.2 Bhera Ram was convicted for the
offences under Sections 324 & 447 IPC, but released while
extending the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders
Act, 1958.
4. Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Jagmal Singh Choudhary
assisted by Mr. Pradeep Choudhary appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits the basic allegation against the appellants,
being that of a sword wound, are not on the record of the learned
Trial Court. And that, the FSL report has not been placed on the
record of the learned Trial Court.
5. Learned Senior counsel further submits that the appellant,
Babu Ram, has undergone 2 years of custody, and that the
appellant no. 2 has expired on 02.10.2013 and that the appeal
against him is already abated.
6. Learned Senior Counsel however, makes a limited submission
that without making any interference on merits/conviction, the
sentence awarded to the present accused-appellants may be
substituted with the period of sentence already undergone by
them.
7. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
8. This Court is conscious of the judgments rendered in,
Alister Anthony Pareira Vs. State of Maharashtra (2012) 2
(Downloaded on 08/04/2022 at 08:28:29 PM)
(3 of 4) [CRLA-338/1993]
SCC 648 and Haripada Das Vs. State of W.B. (1998) 9 SCC
678 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:-
Alister Anthony Pareira (Supra)
"There is no straitjacket formula for sentencing an accused
on proof of crime. The courts have evolved certain
principles: twin objective of the sentencing policy is
deterrence and correction. What sentence would meet the
ends of justice depends on the facts and circumstances of
each case and the court must keep in mind the gravity of
the crime, motive for the crime, nature of the offence and all
other attendant circumstances."
Haripada Das (Supra)
"...considering the fact that the respondent had already
undergone detention for some period and the case is
pending for a pretty long time for which he had suffered
both financial hardship and mental agony and also
considering the fact that he had been released on bail
as far back as on 17-1-1986, we feel that the ends of
justice will be met in the facts of the case if the
sentence is reduced to the period already undergone..."
9. This Court, taking into consideration that the incident in
question occurred in the year 1989, do not think that the accused
should be sent to jail; and thus, while maintaining the conviction
of the appellant-Babu Ram in the aforementioned offences, this
Court reduces the sentences awarded to him therefor, to the
sentence already undergone by him. The appellant-Babu Ram is
on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged.
9.1 However, this Court enhances the fine by an additional
Rs.50,000/- payable to the victim, and in case the victim is
deceased, the same shall be payable to his heirs, in addition to
that which has been already paid by the appellant, Babu Ram. In
(Downloaded on 08/04/2022 at 08:28:29 PM)
(4 of 4) [CRLA-338/1993]
default the appellant shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of three years. The payment may be made within three
months from today. The learned court below shall be required to
execute this order to the extent of enhanced fine.
10. The appeal stand disposed of accordingly. All pending
applications also stand disposed of. The record of learned court
below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
36-SKant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
