Ganga Singh vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 10936 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 59/2007

Ganga Singh S/o Richhpal Singh, by caste Rajput, aged 45 years, resident of Simhasan, P.S. Rughnathgarh, District Sikar (Raj.) (At present lodged in Sub Jail, Deedwana)

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chaitanya Gahlot For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, PP

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Judgment / Order

26/08/2022

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

1998 and the present criminal revision has been pending since the

year 2007.

2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with

Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment

dated 17.01.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Deedwana, District Nagore in Criminal Appeal No.12/05 (Ganga

Singh Vs. State), whereby the judgment dated 15.07.2005 passed

by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ladnu, District

Nagore in Criminal Regular Case No.279/1998, convicting the

revisionist-petitioner was upheld. The petitioner was convicted for

the offence under Sections 279 IPC and was sentenced to undergo

06 months' S.I. and a fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of

which, he was ordered to undergo further 07 days' S.I. For the

(2 of 3) [CRLR-59/2007]

offence under Section 304-A IPC, he was sentenced to undergo

one year's S.I. and a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of

which, he was ordered to undergo further 10 days' S.I.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner further submits

that the sentence so awarded to the revisionist-petitioner was

suspended by this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 24.01.2007

passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5/2007.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner, however,

makes a limited submission that without making any interference

on merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present

revisionist-petitioner may be substituted with the period of

sentence already undergone by him.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.

6. 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

(3 of 3) [CRLR-59/2007]

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..."

7. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the

petitioner, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent

laws, the present petition is partly allowed. Accordingly, while

maintaining the conviction of the petitioner for the offences under

Sections 279 & 304-A IPC, the sentence awarded to the petitioner

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

is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged

accordingly.

8. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the

learned below be sent back forthwith.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

202-Zeeshan

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)