Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jabar Singh And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 292/1994
Jabar Singh And Ors
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajesh Saharan, Amicus Curiae
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
16/05/2022
1. The appeal against appellant no.3 Bhoor Singh already
stands abated as he has expired.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this appeal may kindly be
allowed and the accused appellants may be acquitted of all the
charges levelled against them."
3. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the
year 1990 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
1994.
4. Counsel for the appellant submits that this Criminal Appeal
has been preferred against impugned judgment dated 13.06.1994,
passed by learned District & Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions
Case No.41/90 whereby each of the appellants-Jabar Singh, Jhala,
Bhoor Singh & Hadmat Singh were convicted for offence under
(Downloaded on 21/05/2022 at 08:08:47 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-292/1994]
Section 325 IPC and were sentenced to undergo one year's RI
and a fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine, were ordered
to further undergo one month's RI. Similarly, appellant-Bhim
Singh was convicted for offence under Section 326 IPC and was
sentenced to undergo five years' RI and a fine of Rs.1000/-, in
default of payment of fine, was ordered to further undergo six
months RI.
5. Counsel for the appellant submits that the incident in-
question happened at the spur of moment and there was no
common intention to commit the crime in-question. None of the
injuries grievous in nature. More so, the trial court has failed to
examine any independent witness.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the
sentence so awarded to appellants was however suspended by this
Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 23.06.1994 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail(SOS) No.305/1994.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant, however, makes a limited
submission that without making any interference on
merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present appellants
may be substituted with the period of sentence already undergone
by him.
8. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
9. 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 21/05/2022 at 08:08:47 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-292/1994]
"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..."
10. In light of limited prayer made on behalf of the appellants,
and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent laws, the
present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while maintaining
the appellant's Jabar Singh, Jhala & Hadmat Singh for the
offence under Section 325 IPC and of appellant-Bhim Singh under
Section 326 IPC, as above, the sentence awarded to them is
reduced to the period already undergone by them. The appellants
are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds stand
discharged accordingly.
All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
40-Sanjay/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
