Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nandlal And Anr vs State on 20 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLR-302/2000]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 302/2000
Nandlal And Anr
----Petitioner
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gokulesh Bohra
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment
20/05/2022
1. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1992 and the present criminal revision has been pending since the
year 2000.
2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with
Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment
dated 13.06.2000 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Nimbahera in criminal appeal case no.41/99, whereby the
judgment dated 14.10.1999 passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Dungla, District Chittorgarh in criminal
case no.77/92, convicting the revisionist-petitioners was upheld.
The petitioners were convicted for the offences under Section
19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act, and were sentenced to undergo
one years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of
which, they were ordered to undergo further three months' S.I.
3. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners further
submits that the sentence so awarded to the revisionist-
(Downloaded on 24/05/2022 at 08:25:34 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-302/2000]
petitioners was suspended by this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated
10.06.2002 passed in S.B. Criminal Application for Suspension of
Sentence No.91/2000.
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
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..."
(Downloaded on 24/05/2022 at 08:25:34 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-302/2000]
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 offence under
Section 19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act, 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 below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
45-Sudheer/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
