Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ishraq Ahmed And Ors vs State on 7 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1038/2002
Ishraq Ahmed And Ors
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. MS Bhati, 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. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with
Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment
dated 20.11.2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,
(Fast Track) Chittorgarh in criminal appeal No.54/2002 whereby
the judgment dated 27.09.2000 passed by the learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.1, Chittorgarh in criminal case
No.119/93 convicting the revisionist-petitioners was upheld. The
petitioners were convicted for the offences under Sections 147,
452 & 323/149 IPC and were sentenced to undergo as under:-
147 IPC : 01 year's R.I. and a fine of Rs.100/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo two months R.I.
(Downloaded on 11/05/2022 at 08:30:59 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-1038/2002]
452 IPC : 01 year's R.I. and a fine of Rs.100/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo two months R.I.
323/149 IPC : 06 months' R.I. and a fine of Rs.100/-
in default of payment of fine to
further undergo two months R.I.
3. 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
28.11.2002 passed in S.B. Criminal Bail Application No.235/2002.
4. 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.
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
(Downloaded on 11/05/2022 at 08:30:59 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-1038/2002]
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..."
7. 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 147, 452 & 323/149 IPC, 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.
8. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
53-KshamaD/nirmala-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
