Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Deva Ram And Ors vs State on 8 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 503/1993
Deva Ram And Ors.
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Yogita Mohanani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
08/04/2022
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. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court will be pleased
to send for the record of the court below, peruse the same and
after perusal, quash the convictions and sentences, or pass
any other orders that this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper."
3. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the
impugned judgment dated 20.11.1993, passed by the learned
Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.67/93 whereby
the appellants were convicted for the offences under Section 147
IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
(Downloaded on 13/04/2022 at 08:21:22 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-503/1993]
and sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment for the
first count and six months and a fine of Rs. 500/- for the second
count, in default of payment of which he was ordered to further
undergo 1½ month.
4. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1993 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
1993.
5. At the outset, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the
accused-appellant No.2 Paboo Ram had already expired on
29.08.2015, which is reflected in the report dated 05.04.2022
furnished by the learned Public Prosecutor before this Court. The
said report is taken on record.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the sentence
so awarded to the appellant was however suspended by this
Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 16.12.1993 passed in S.B.
Criminal Bail No.475/1993.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant qua accused-appellants
No.1, 3 to 5, however, makes a limited submission that without
making any interference on merits/conviction, the sentence
awarded to the said appellants may be substituted with the period
of sentence already undergone by them.
8. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
9. This Court is conscious of the judgments rendered in,
Alister Anthony Pareira Vs. State of Maharashtra (2012) 2
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)
(Downloaded on 13/04/2022 at 08:21:22 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-503/1993]
"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..."
10. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the
appellants No.1, 3 to 5, and keeping in mind the aforementioned
precedent laws, the present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly,
while maintaining the conviction of the appellants No.1, 3 to 5,
under Section 147 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, as above, the sentence awarded to them is
reduced to the period already undergone by them. The appellants
are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds stand
discharged accordingly.
11. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
17-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
