Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Surendra Singh 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. 161/1990
Surendra Singh And Ors.
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Sumeha Kalla for
Mr. Sanjay Mathur
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, humbly prayed that this appeal may kindly be
accepted and the accused-appellants may be acquitted forthwith."
3. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1987 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
1990.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that this Criminal
Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated
18.05.1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Rajsamand in Sessions Case 11/88 whereby the appellants were
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:22:04 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-161/1990]
acquitted from the offence under Section 302/149 IPC but
convicted for the offences under Sections 148 & 324/149 IPC and
sentenced to undergo two years' R.I. & three years' R.I.
respectively.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the
sentence so awarded to the appellants was however suspended by
this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 04.06.1990 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.170/1990.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants, however, makes a limited
submission that without making any interference on
merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present 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
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
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:22:04 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-161/1990]
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. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the
appellants, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent
laws, the present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while
maintaining the appellants' conviction under Sections 148 &
324/149 IPC, 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.
10. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
16-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
