Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sanwarmal And Ors vs State on 18 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 161/1996
Sanwarmal And Ors
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Chaitanya Gahlot
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Javed Gauri, PP
Mr. Suresh Kumbhat
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
18/05/2022
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this appeal may
kindly be allowed, judgment and order of the learned trial
Judge, Additional Sessions Judge, Ratangarh, dated 28.2.96
be set aside and the accused-appellants be acquitted of the
offence under Section 498-A IPC and the sentence passed
against them thereunder be set aside and they be set at
liberty."
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1986 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
1996.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that this Criminal
Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated
28.02.1996 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Ratangarh in Sessions Case No.118/1992 whereby the appellants
(Downloaded on 20/05/2022 at 08:23:00 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-161/1996]
though, were acquitted for the offence under Section 306 IPC, but
were convicted for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and
sentenced to undergo three years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-,
default of payment of which they were ordered to further undergo
six months' R.I. each.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that out of three
accused-appellants, two accused-appellants namely appellant
No.1-Sanwarmal Soni and appellant No.3-Smt. Mohni Devi have
expired, which is reflected from the death certificates issued by
the competent authority. The only accused-appellant No.2-Vinod
Kumar is surviving. The death certificates are taken on record.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the
sentence so awarded to the appellants was however suspended by
this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 07.03.1996 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail (Suspension of Sentence) No.146/1996.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants however, makes a limited
submission that without making any interference on
merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present appellant
may be substituted with the period of sentence already undergone
by him.
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)
"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
(Downloaded on 20/05/2022 at 08:23:00 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-161/1996]
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 appellant,
and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent laws, the
present appeal qua appellant No.1-Sanwarmal and appellant No.3-
Smt. Mohni Devi is dismissed as having abated. However, the
appeal qua appellant No.2-Vinod Kumar is partly allowed.
Accordingly, while maintaining the conviction of appellant No.2
under Sections 498-A IPC, as above, the sentence awarded to him
is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The appellant
No.2 is on bail. He need not surrender. His 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.
28-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
