Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Teja vs State on 19 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLA-303/1994]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 303/1994
Teja
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Himanshu Trivedi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.R.Choudhary, PP.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment
19/05/2022
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this appeal may
kindly be allowed and the appellant may be acquitted for the
aforesaid offences."
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1988 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
1994.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Criminal
Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated
31.05.1994, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge
No.1, Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No.128/88 whereby the
appellant was though acquitted for the offences under Section
302, 394 IPC, but convicted for the offences under Sections 304-A
(Downloaded on 20/05/2022 at 08:31:55 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-303/1994]
& 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo nine months' and three
months' respectively.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the
sentence so awarded to the appellant was however suspended by
this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 31.05.1995 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. II Bail No.242/1995.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant, 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.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
7. 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
(Downloaded on 20/05/2022 at 08:31:55 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-303/1994]
be met in the facts of the case if the sentence is reduced to
the period already undergone..."
8. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the appellant,
and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent laws, the
present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while maintaining
the appellant's conviction under Sections 304A & 323 IPC, as
above, the sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period
already undergone by him. The appellant is on bail. He need not
surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged accordingly.
9. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
38-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
