Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Manohar Lal vs State on 8 July, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 577/1994
Manohar Lal
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Yogita Mohanani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Rajpurohit, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
08/07/2022
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court will
be pleased to send for the record of the lower court,
peruse the same and after perusal, quash the
conviction and sentences passed against the
accused, acquit him or pass any other orders that
this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper."
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1994 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
1994.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Criminal
Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated
28.11.1994 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities cases)
Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.84/1994 whereby the appellant was
convicted for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and sentenced
(Downloaded on 12/07/2022 at 08:40:09 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-577/1994]
to undergo two years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.2000/- in default of
payment of which he was ordered further to undergo four months'
S.I.
4. 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 07.12.1994 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail (suspension of sentence) No.539/1994.
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 appellant
may be substituted with the period of sentence already undergone
by him.
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
(Downloaded on 12/07/2022 at 08:40:09 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-577/1994]
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 appellant,
and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent laws, the
present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while maintaining
the appellant's conviction under Section 498-A 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.
9. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
40-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
