Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Lekhraj vs State on 25 May, 2022

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Judge)

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 409/2003

Lekhraj

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan

----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 410/2003 Lekhraj

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. SG Ojha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gouri, PP

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

25/05/2022 S.B. CRLR No.409/2003:

1. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year

1990 and the present criminal revision has been pending since the

year 2003.

2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with

Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment

dated 28.04.2003 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi in

Criminal Appeal No.61/2003, whereby the judgment dated

27.07.1999 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi

(2 of 5) [CRLR-409/2003]

in Criminal Original Case No.218/1997, convicting the revisionist-

petitioner was upheld. The petitioner was sentenced as under:-

409 IPC : 01 year's R.I. and a fine of Rs.2000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' S.I.

467 IPC : 01 year's R.I and a fine of Rs.2000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo 06 months' S.I.

468 IPC : 06 months' R.I and a fine of Rs.1000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo 03 months' S.I.

471 IPC : 06 months' R.I and a fine of Rs.1000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo 03 months' S.I.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner further submits

that the sentence so awarded to the revisionist-petitioner was

suspended by this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 09.05.2003.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner, however,

makes a limited submission that without making any interference

on merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present

revisionist-petitioner may be substituted with the period of

sentence already undergone by him.

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

(3 of 5) [CRLR-409/2003]

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..."

7. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the

petitioner, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent

laws, the present petition is partly allowed. Accordingly, while

maintaining the conviction of the petitioner's for the offences

under Sections 409, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, the sentence awarded to

him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The

petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand

discharged accordingly.

8. All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the

learned court below be sent back forthwith.

S.B. CRLR No.410/2003:

1. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year

1990 and the present criminal revision has been pending since the

year 2003.

2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with

Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment

dated 28.04.2003 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi in

Criminal Appeal No.62/2003, whereby the judgment dated

(4 of 5) [CRLR-409/2003]

27.07.1999 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi

in Criminal Original Case No.217/1997, convicting the revisionist-

petitioner was upheld. The petitioner was sentenced as under:-

409 IPC : 01 year's R.I. and a fine of Rs.2000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' S.I.

467 IPC : 01 year's R.I and a fine of Rs.2000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo 06 months' S.I.

468 IPC : 06 months' R.I and a fine of Rs.1000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo 03 months' S.I.

471 IPC : 06 months' R.I and a fine of Rs.1000/-

in default of payment of fine to further undergo 03 months' S.I.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner further submits

that the sentence so awarded to the revisionist-petitioner was

suspended by this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 09.05.2003.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner, however,

makes a limited submission that without making any interference

on merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present

revisionist-petitioner may be substituted with the period of

sentence already undergone by him.

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

(5 of 5) [CRLR-409/2003]

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..."

7. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the

petitioner, and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent

laws, the present petition is partly allowed. Accordingly, while

maintaining the conviction of the petitioner for the offences under

Sections 409, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, the sentence awarded to him is

reduced to the period already undergone by him. The petitioner is

on bail. He need not to surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged

accordingly.