Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ramchandra vs State on 27 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLA-285/1993]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 285/1993
Ramchandra
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Abhishek Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
27/04/2022
1. In 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 Court, for the safety of
all concerned.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming for the following reliefs:-
"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lordship may be
pleased to accept this appeal and set aside the judgment
dated 5.8.993."
3. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1991 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
05.08.1993 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions
Judge, Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh in Sessions Case
No.44/1992 whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences
(Downloaded on 29/04/2022 at 08:24:29 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-285/1993]
under Sections 376/511, 354 & 457 IPC and sentenced as under:-
(sentences will concurrently)
376/511 IPC : 05 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.1000/-
354 IPC : 06 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.100/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 03 months SI.
457 IPC : 02 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.500/-
5. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the
sentence so awarded to the appellant was however suspended by
this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 15.09.1993 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.295/1999.
6. 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.
7. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
8. Learned Public Prosecutor has shown a report of the
concerned jurisdiction dated 27.04.2022, which reflects that the
appellant has attained the age of 80 years and is on death bed
due to his medical condition.
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
(Downloaded on 29/04/2022 at 08:24:29 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-285/1993]
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 appellant,
and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent laws as well
as on account of the report submitted by learned PP dated
27.04.2022, which reflects that appellant has attained age of 80
years and is bed ridden due to his medical condition, the present
appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while maintaining the
appellant's conviction under Sections 376/511, 354 & 457 IPC, 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.
35-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
