Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ram Bhagat And Ors vs State on 24 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLA-423/2000]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 423/2000
Ram Bhagat And Ors
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. S.G. Ojha
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anda Ram Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment
24/05/2022
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that
your Lordships may kindly be pleased to accept this appeal,
set aside the conviction and sentence passed against the
accused appellants and acquit them of the charges levelled
against the accused appellants."
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year
1999 and the present appeal has been pending since the year
2000.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that this Criminal
Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated
24.07.2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Nohar, District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case no.56/1999
whereby the appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:-
(Downloaded on 25/05/2022 at 08:59:51 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-423/2000]
Section Sentence
447 IPC One month's R.I.
325/34 IPC One year's R.I., and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default
of payment of which they were ordered to further
undergo fifteen days R.I.
323/34 IPC Two months' R.I.
426/34 IPC One month's R.I.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the matter
has been settled outside the Court.
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 07.08.2000 passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail (Suspension of Sentence) Petition
No.263/2000.
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 appellants
may be substituted with the period of sentence already undergone
by them.
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
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
(Downloaded on 25/05/2022 at 08:59:51 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-423/2000]
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
appellants, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent
laws, the present appeal is partly allowed. Accordingly, while
maintaining the appellants' conviction under Sections 447,
325/34, 323/34, & 426/34 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.
10. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
59-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
