Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Prakash Kanwar vs State on 7 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 536/2002
Smt. Prakash Kanwar
----Petitioner
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar, Amicus Curiae
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
07/05/2022
1. In the 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 the Court, for the safety
of all concerned.
2. Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate is appointed as Amicus Curiae to
argue the matter on behalf of the accused-petitioner under the
free legal aid scheme of RSLSA. His remuneration shall be paid by
the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority as per the rules.
3. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1983 and the present criminal revision has been pending since the
year 2002.
4. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with
Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment
dated 15.07.2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge
(Fast Track), Jalore in Criminal Appeal No.30/2002 whereby the
judgment dated 05.08.1997 passed by learned Chief Judicial
(Downloaded on 13/05/2022 at 08:17:27 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-536/2002]
Magistrate, Jalore in Criminal Regular Case No.172/93, convicting
the revisionist-petitioner was upheld. The petitioner was convicted
for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and was
sentenced to undergo as under:- (sentences to run concurrently)
420 IPC : 01 years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.5000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 06 months' S.I.
467 IPC : 01 years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.5000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 06 months' S.I.
468 IPC : 01 years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.5000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 06 months' S.I.
471 IPC : 01 years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.5000/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo 06 months' S.I.
5. 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 24.07.2002
passed in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.536/2002.
6. 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 her.
7. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
8. 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)
(Downloaded on 13/05/2022 at 08:17:27 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-536/2002]
"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
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..."
9. 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 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, the sentence awarded to her is
reduced to the period already undergone by her. The petitioner is
on bail. She need not surrender. Her bail bonds stand discharged
accordingly.
10. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
47-Sanjay/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
