Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagmala Ram And Anr vs State on 5 July, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 471/2005
Jagmala Ram And Anr
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Chaitanya Gahlot
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
05/07/2022
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr. P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this
appeal may be allowed and the judgment of conviction and order
of sentence dated 02.06.2005 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bikaner in Sessions Case
No.78/2004 - State Vs. Jagmala Ram & Anr., convicting and
sentencing the appellants as aforesaid may kindly be quashed and
set aside, consequently, the appellants may kindly be acquitted
for the charges levelled against them."
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
2004 and the present appeal is pending since the year 2005.
3. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the
impugned judgment dated 02.06.2005 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bikaner in Sessions
Case No.78/2004 whereby the appellants were convicted and
sentenced as follows :-
(Downloaded on 06/07/2022 at 08:45:26 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-471/2005]
Sections 354 IPC :
Two years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default of payment
of fine to further undergo six months simple imprisonment.
Section 451 IPC :
Two years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default of payment
of fine to further undergo three months simple
imprisonment.
4. Counsel for the appellant further submits that the sentence
so awarded to the appellants was however suspended by this
Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 15.06.2005 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail Petition No.374/2005.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant, 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.
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."
(Downloaded on 06/07/2022 at 08:45:26 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-471/2005]
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
appellants, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent
laws, the present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while
maintaining the appellants conviction under Sections 451 & 354
IPC, as above, the sentence awarded to them is reduced to the
period already undergone by them. Compensation amount of
Rs.10,000/-, which was directed to be paid to the victim is,
however, enhanced to Rs.25,000/- each. The compensation
amount of Rs.50,000/- shall be released to the prosecutrix/victim
in accordance with para-9 of the sentence-order. The enhanced
amount shall be deposited within a period of three months from
today. The appellants are on bail. They need not surrender. Their
bail-bonds stand discharged accordingly.
09. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
156-nirmala/Sanjay-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
