Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jeevan Singh And Anr vs State on 26 July, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLR-134/2007]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 134/2007
Jeevan Singh And Anr
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhawani Singh &
Mr. Amit Kumar Purohit on behalf of
Mr. Chaitanya Gahlot
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment
26/07/2022
1. Heard.
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1999 and the present criminal revision has been pending since the
year 2007.
3. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with
Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment
dated 17.02.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Nathdwara in criminal appeal No.36/2006, whereby the judgment
dated 20.09.2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Class-I, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand in criminal regular case
No. 128/2002 convicting the revisionist-petitioners was upheld.
The petitioners were convicted for the offence under Section
19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1954 and were sentenced to
undergo one year's S.I. and a fine of Rs.1000/- in default of
(Downloaded on 28/07/2022 at 08:46:47 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-134/2007]
payment of which, they were ordered to undergo further one
months' S.I.
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
26.02.2007 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (Suspension of
Sentence) Application No.18/2007.
5. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners, however,
makes a limited submission that without making any interference
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
(Downloaded on 28/07/2022 at 08:46:47 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-134/2007]
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..."
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 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, the sentence awarded
to them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. The
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 court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
175-Sanjay/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
