Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Okharam And Anr vs State on 20 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLA-572/2000]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 572/2000
Okharam And Anr
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Chakravarti Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP
Mr. Ashok Upadhayay
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment
20/05/2022
1. 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, the Judgment dt. 26.09.2000 passed by the
learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhinmal convicting and
sentencing the Appellants may kindly be quashed and set-
aside."
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1998 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
2000.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Criminal
Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated
26.09.2000 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions
Judge, Bhinmal District Jalore in Sessions Case No.69/99, whereby
the appellants was convicted for the offences under Sections 325,
323, 325/34, 323/34 respectively and they were sentenced as
under:-
(Sentences will run concurrently)
(Downloaded on 24/05/2022 at 08:23:45 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-572/2000]
Appellant-Vardaram:-
Under Section 325 IPC:- Two years R.I. and a fine of Rs.3000/- in
default of payment of which he was ordered to undergo additional
three months' R.I.
Under Section 323 IPC:- Three months' R.I. and a fine of Rs.500/-
in default of payment of which he was ordered to undergo
additional fifteen days' R.I.
Appellant- Okharam:-
Under Section 325/34 IPC:- Two years R.I. and a fine of Rs.3000/-
in default of payment of which he was ordered to undergo
additional three months' R.I.
Under Section 323/34 IPC:- Three months' R.I. and a fine of
Rs.500/- in default of payment of which he was ordered to
undergo additional fifteen days' R.I.
4. 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 12.10.2000 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.382/2000.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants, 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 them.
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:-
(Downloaded on 24/05/2022 at 08:23:45 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-572/2000]
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..."
8. In light of the 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 appellants' conviction under Sections 325, 323,
325/34, 323/34, 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.
9. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
40-Sudheer/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
