Indra Raj vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:25698)
2023 Latest Caselaw 5865 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:25698]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 101/1995

Indra Raj S/o Shri Hari Ram, by caste Jat, resident of Binjhvayla, Tehsil Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar

----Appellant Versus State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Praveen Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukhtyar Khan, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Judgment

14/08/2023

1. The appellant has preferred the instant appeal under Section

374 of the CrPC being aggrieved of the judgment dated

23.02.1995 passed by the learned Special Judge, Schedule Caste

and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases and

Additional Sessions Judge, Bikaner in Sessions Case No.54/1990

(69/1989 - old), whereby he has been convicted for the offence

under Section 323 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment of one year. He has also been directed to deposit a

compensation of Rs.10,000/- to be disbursed to the father of the

deceased.

2. Briefly stated, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the

case are that on 22.05.1989 at 06.30 p.m. Keshuram S/o

[2023:RJ-JD:25698] (2 of 6) [CRLA-101/1995]

Khemaram resident of Kuchor Angooni submitted an oral

information at the Police Station Napasar, District Bikaner to the

effect that the complainant and his brothers Mani Ram and Surja

Ram came back from Bikaner at about 02.30 p.m. and were

purchasing vegetables etc. at Napasar Market. At about 04.30

p.m., Indraj S/o Hari Ram Jat, country made liquor contractor, was

going from Bus Stand towards Kilchu Road. Mani Ram went to

him for liquor and asked him to give a quarter from his shop, for

which Indraj asked for Rs.15/-, upon which Mani Ram told that

earlier only Rs.9/- was charged for the same. An altercation took

place on this issue. Indraj pushed and made him fall on the

ground and kicked him on head and other vital parts. The

complainant and Surja Ram intervened and took Indraj in control.

Hari Ram and Mohan Lal also came there. Mani Ram became

unconscious. He was taken to the hospital, where he was

declared dead. On the aforesaid information, FIR No.18/1989 was

registered and after usual investigation, a charge-sheet came to

be filed against the appellant for the offence under Section 302 of

the IPC.

3. The learned trial court framed charges against the appellant

for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC and upon denial of

guilt by the accused, commenced the trial. During the course of

trial, as many as 10 witnesses were examined and 12 documents

were exhibited. Thereafter, an explanation was sought from the

accused-appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which he denied

the prosecution allegations and claimed to be falsely implicated in

[2023:RJ-JD:25698] (3 of 6) [CRLA-101/1995]

the case. 5 documents were exhibited in defence. Then, after

hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence

Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence,

learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant for the

offence under Section 323 of the IPC vide judgment dated

23.02.1995, which is under assail before this court in the instant

appeal.

4. After arguing on merits to some extent, learned counsel for

the appellant does not wish to press the present appeal in respect

of the judgment of conviction passed by the learned trial court and

preferred to make submissions on the point of sentence only. He

submits that an altercation ensued on a trivial issue regarding

price of quarter of liquor and in the heat of the moment, the

appellant, who was a young boy aged 20 years, pushed and

kicked the deceased. The incident is of the year 1989. It was the

first criminal case registered against the appellant. No adverse

remark has been passed over his conduct in the impugned

judgment. He has faced the rigor of criminal case for good 34

years and has languished in jail for nearly 4 months during trial

and after conviction. No fruitful purpose would be served by

sending the appellant to jail at this stage. He, therefore, prays

that the sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the

period already undergone.

5. Learned public prosecutor has, of course, been able to

defend the case on merits but does not refute the fact that the

[2023:RJ-JD:25698] (4 of 6) [CRLA-101/1995]

appellant has remained behind the bars for some time, it was the

first criminal case registered against him and that the incident is

very old and much time has already gone by since then.

6. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned

Public prosecutor and perused the record and other material

available on the record.

7. Since the appeal against conviction is not pressed and after

perusing the record, nothing is noticed which requires interference

in the finding of guilt reached by learned trial court, this court

does not wish to interfere in the judgment of conviction.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is maintained.

8. As far as the question of quantum of sentence is concerned,

it is worthwhile to note that the incident is of the year 1989. The

dispute arose on a trivial issue of price of quarter of liquor and in

the spur of the moment the appellant caused injuries to the

deceased. At the time of the incident, the accused appellant was

20 years of age and now he has turned 54. The right to speedy

and expeditious trial is one of the most valuable and cherished

rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The appellant has

already suffered the agony of protracted trial, spanning over a

period of more than 34 years and has been in the corridors of the

court for this prolonged period. He has remained incarcerated for

around 4 months and the total sentence awarded is 1 year. The

reformative theory of punishment is in vogue in our country and

[2023:RJ-JD:25698] (5 of 6) [CRLA-101/1995]

since the appellant is living peacefully since last 34 years as no

report contrary to that has been received by this court, thus, it

can be assumed that he has been reformed and no fruitful

purpose would be served by sending him to jail at this stage as

much misery has already been inflicted upon him.

9. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the case of the

appellant deserves to be dealt with leniency. The appellant also

deserves the benefit of the consistent view taken by this court in

this regard. Thus, guided by the judicial pronouncements made

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Haripada Das Vs.

State of West Bangal reported in (1998) 9 SCC 678 and

Alister Anthony Pareira vs. State of Maharashtra reported in

2012 2 SCC 648 and considering the facts and circumstances of

the case, age of appellant, his criminal antecedents, his status in

the society and the fact that he faced financial hardship and had

to go through mental agony, this court is of the view that ends of

justice would be met, if sentence imposed upon him is reduced to

the period already undergone by him.

10. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction dated 23.02.1995

passed by the learned Special Judge, Schedule Caste and

Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases and Additional

Sessions Judge, Bikaner in Sessions Case No.54/1990 (69/1989 -

old) is affirmed, but the quantum of sentence awarded by the

learned trial court for the offence under Section 323 of the IPC is

modified to the extent that the sentence he has undergone till

[2023:RJ-JD:25698] (6 of 6) [CRLA-101/1995]

date would be sufficient and justifiable to serve the interest of

justice. The appellant is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail

bonds are discharged.

11. The appeal is allowed in part.

12. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.

13. Record be sent back to the trial court.

(FARJAND ALI),J 56-Pramod/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)