Kishore Singh And Anr vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 5390 Raj

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
                     S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 223/1993

Kishore Singh And Anr
                                                                      ----Appellant
                                       Versus
State of Rajasthan
                                                                    ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)             :     Mr. BS Balot
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

                                        Order

12/04/2022

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:-


        ".vr%    Jheku vnkyr ls ;kpuk gS fd vihykUVl fd'kksj flag o
        Hkwj flag ;g vihy Lohdkj dj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; dk vkns'k
        fnukad 9&6&93 dk fujLr Qjek dj vihykUVl dks cjh fd;k
        tkosA"


3.   The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year

1992 and the present appeal has been pending since the year

1993.

4.   Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Criminal

Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated


                        (Downloaded on 19/04/2022 at 08:02:29 PM)
                                                (2 of 3)                     [CRLA-223/1993]


09.06.1993         passed      by     the      learned       Special       Court,        SC/ST

(Prevention of Atrocities), Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.165/1992

whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence under

Section    3(1)(IV)       SC/ST       (Prevention           of    Atrocities)    Act       and

sentenced to undergo six months S.I. and a fine of Rs.200/-

default of payment of which they were ordered to further undergo

one months S.I.

5.     Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that

appellant No.1 Kishor Singh has expired and the present appeal is

surviving for appellant No.2 Bhoor Singh only.

6.     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 28.06.1993 passed in S.B.

Criminal Bail Application No.221/1993.

7.     Learned counsel for the appellant, however, makes a limited

submission         that     without         making           any       interference         on

merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present appellant

may be substituted with the period of sentence already undergone

by him.

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)
     "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


                          (Downloaded on 19/04/2022 at 08:02:29 PM)
                                                                                 (3 of 3)                   [CRLA-223/1993]

                                         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 appellant,

                                   and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent laws, the

                                   present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while maintaining

                                   the     appellant's      conviction        under        Section      3(1)(IV)     SC/ST

                                   (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, as above, the sentence awarded to

                                   him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The

                                   appellant is on bail. He need not surrender. His 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.

50-Nirmala/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)