Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jogaram And Anr vs State on 22 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 140/2002
Jogaram And Anr
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
22/04/2022
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 revision has been pending since the
year 2002.
3. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with
Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment
dated 21.02.2002 passed by learned Additional District and
Sessions Judge, No.2, Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No.31/2001 and
32/2001, whereby the judgment dated 06.06.1998 passed by the
learned Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Osian in Criminal
Original Case No.133/1992 convicting the revisionist-petitioners
was upheld. The petitioners were convicted for the offences under
(Downloaded on 26/04/2022 at 08:37:55 PM)
(2 of 4) [CRLR-140/2002]
Sections 467, 468, 471, 477 & 420 IPC and sentenced as under:-
(sentences will concurrently)
Joga Ram
467 IPC : 03 years RI and a fine of Rs.3000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 03 months SI.
468 IPC : 30 months RI and a fine of Rs.2000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo two months SI.
471 IPC : two years RI.
477 IPC : 03 years RI and a fine of Rs.1000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo one month SI.
420 IPC : 03 years RI and a fine of Rs.1000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo one month SI.
Brijwasi Lal
467 IPC : 30 months RI and a fine of Rs.3000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 03 months SI.
468 IPC : 02 years RI and a fine of Rs.1000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 01 month SI.
471 IPC : 18 months RI.
477 IPC : 02 years RI and a fine of Rs.1000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo one month SI.
420 IPC : 02 years RI and a fine of Rs.500/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 15 days SI.
4. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners further
submits that the sentence so awarded to the revisionist-
petitioners was suspended by this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated
26.03.2002 passed in S.B. Criminal Bail No.27/2002.
5. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners, however,
makes a limited submission that without making any interference
(Downloaded on 26/04/2022 at 08:37:55 PM)
(3 of 4) [CRLR-140/2002]
on merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present
revisionist-petitioners may be substituted with the period of
sentence already undergone by them.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
7. 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
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..."
8. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the
petitioners, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent
laws, the present petition is partly allowed. Accordingly, while
maintaining the conviction of the petitioners for the offences under
Sections 467, 468, 471, 477 & 420 IPC, the sentence awarded to
them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. The
(Downloaded on 26/04/2022 at 08:37:55 PM)
(4 of 4) [CRLR-140/2002]
petitioners are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds
stand discharged accordingly.
9. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
84-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
