Anand Kumar vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 7085 Raj

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 623/2001

Anand Kumar
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Pritam Solnaki
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Arun Kumar, PP



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

                                 Judgment

12/05/2022
1.   The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year

1983 and the present criminal revision has been pending since the

year 2001.

2.   This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with

Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment

dated 03.10.2001 passed by learned Additional District and

Sessions Judge, No.3, Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No.75/99

whereby the judgment dated 19.08.1999 passed by the learned

Judicial   Magistrate   No.3,      Jodhpur        in    criminal   original   case

No.1542/1994 convicting the revisionist-petitioner was upheld.

The petitioner was convicted for the offence under Sections 279 &

304-A of IPC and was sentenced to undergo six months S.I. and a

fine of Rs.2000/- in default of payment of which, he was ordered

to undergo further fifteen days S.I.

3.   Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner further submits

that the sentence so awarded to the revisionist-petitioner was

                     (Downloaded on 17/05/2022 at 08:26:26 PM)
                                                 (2 of 3)                  [CRLR-623/2001]


suspended by this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 16.10.2001

passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (SOS) Application No. 142/2001.

4.     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 him.

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
     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

petitioner, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent


                           (Downloaded on 17/05/2022 at 08:26:26 PM)
                                                                           (3 of 3)                [CRLR-623/2001]


                                   laws, the present petition is partly allowed. Accordingly, while

                                   maintaining the conviction of the petitioners for the offences under

                                   Sections Sections 279 & 304-A IPC, the sentence awarded to him

                                   is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The petitioner

                                   is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged

                                   accordingly.

                                   8.    All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the

                                   learned below be sent back forthwith.




                                                               (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

60-Sudheer/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)