Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Munna @ Muneshiya vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:43065) on 11 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:43065]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 808/2017
Munna @ Muneshiya S/o Badaniya, By Caste Kanjar, R/o Manji
Ka Guda, P.s. Bhadesar, District Chittorgarh Raj. Presently
Lodged At District Jail Chittorgarh
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Zafar Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP with
Mr. CP Marwan
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
11/12/2023
Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated
22.05.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2,
Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the
appellate court') in Criminal Appeal No.36/2015 by which the
appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld
the judgment dated 18.01.2013 passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Mandphiya, District Chittorgarh (hereinafter referred
to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Regular Case No.77/2008,
whereby, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the
present petitioner as under :
Offence U/s 148 IPC : Six months' S.I. and a fine of Rs.200/-,
in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days'
Additional S.I.
[2023:RJ-JD:43065] (2 of 4) [CRLR-808/2017]
Offence U/s 323/149 IPC : One month's S.I. and a fine of
Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 5 days'
Additional S.I.
Offence U/s 325/149 IPC : One year's S.I. and a fine of
Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one
month's Additional S.I.
Offence U/s 326/149 IPC : Two year's S.I. and a fine of
Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one
month's Additional S.I.
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Brief facts of the case are that on 27.06.1996, complainant
Lalia submitted an oral report at Police Station Bhadesar to the
effect that the accused persons namely Badaniya, Munna,
Kailashiya, Rameshiya, Ganpat & Bhanwariya came armed with
deadly weapons like sword, axe, dhariya etc. and caused grievous
injuries to the complainant and his father. On this report, the
police registered the case against the accused persons including
the present petitioner and for offences under Sections 147, 148,
149, 323 IPC and started investigation.
On completion of investigation, the police filed challan
against the accused persons including the petitioner for offence
under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 326 IPC. Thereafter, the
charges of the case were framed against the accused persons
including the petitioner, who denied the charges and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined sixteen
witnesses and also exhibited various documents. Thereafter,
statements of the accused persons including the petitioner under
section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded.
[2023:RJ-JD:43065] (3 of 4) [CRLR-808/2017]
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 18.01.2013 convicted and sentenced
the accused-petitioner for offences as mentioned earlier.
Aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner
preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which
came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 22.05.2017. Hence
this revision petition.
At the threshold, counsel for the petitioner does not
challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the
occurrence relates back to year 1996 and he has so far suffered a
sentence of about three months, out of total sentence of two
years. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the substantive
sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner for the offence under
Sections 148, 323/149, 325/149, 326/149 IPC may be reduced to
the period already undergone by him.
On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-
petitioner. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any
occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused
petitioner nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said
case.
I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as
defence and the judgment passed by the courts below regarding
conviction of the accused-petitioner.
It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the
year 1996 and the accused-petitioner has so far undergone a
period of three months incarceration out of total sentence of two
[2023:RJ-JD:43065] (4 of 4) [CRLR-808/2017]
years S.I., and so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of
protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and
the fact that the accused-petitioner has remained behind the bars
for considerable time, it will be just and proper if the sentence
awarded by the trial court for offence under Sections 148,
323/149, 325/149, 326/149 IPC and affirmed by the appellate
court is reduced to the period already undergone by him while
maintaining the amount of fine.
Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed.
While maintaining the petitioner's conviction and sentence for
offence under Sections 148, 323/149, 325/149, 326/149 IPC, the
sentence awarded to him for aforesaid offences is hereby reduced
to the period already undergone. The amount of fine is hereby
maintained. Three months' time is granted to deposit the fine
before the trial court. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner
shall undergo one month's simple imprisonment. The petitioner is
on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged.
The record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
239-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
