Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Badri @ Badriya And Anr vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:43590) on 13 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:43590]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 415/2007
(1) Badri Ram @ Badriya S/o Shri Gangaram, B/c Jat, R/o
Surpura Khurd, PS Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur.
(2) Malaram S/o Shri Bhanwara Ram, B/c Mali, R/ Ratiyon Ki
Dhani, Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur.
(Lodged in Sub-Jail Balotra)
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Shah, amicus curiae
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP with
Mr. CP Marwan
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
13/12/2023
It has been informed to this Court that Mr. Mahendra
Solanki, Adv., counsel appearing for the petitioners, has expired.
Thus, this Court appoints Mr. Pradeep Shah, Adv. as Amicus
curiae to represent case of the petitioners before this Court.
Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioners challenging the judgment dated
03.05.2007 passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Balotra
(hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') in Criminal Appeal
No.06/2007 by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of
the petitioners and upheld the judgment dated 16.12.2006 passed
by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Balotra (hereinafter referred to
[2023:RJ-JD:43590] (2 of 4) [CRLR-415/2007]
as 'the trial court') in Criminal Original Case No.288/2005,
whereby, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the
present petitioners as under :
Offence U/s 457 IPC : Three years' R.I. and a fine of
Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further undergo two
months' S.I.
Offence U/s 380 IPC : Two years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000/-,
in default of payment of fine, further undergo one month's S.I.
Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Brief facts of the case are that on 13.02.2005, complainant
Mohanlal submitted a written report before Police Station Samdari
to the effect that a temple of Prajapat community is situated at
Karmawas Bas stand and he is the cashier in the said temple. In
the intervening night of 12.02.2005, 3-4 unknown persons
unlawfully entered in the temple and committed theft of money,
gold and silver ornaments etc. On this report, the police registered
the case against unknown accused persons for offences under
Sections 457, 380 IPC and started investigation. During the course
of investigation, the Police arrested the accused-persons including
the present petitioners.
On completion of investigation, the police filed challan
against the accused persons including the petitioners. Thereafter,
the charges of the case were framed against the accused-persons
including the petitioners, who denied the charges and claimed
trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined thirteen
witnesses and also exhibited various documents. Thereafter,
[2023:RJ-JD:43590] (3 of 4) [CRLR-415/2007]
statements of the accused persons including the petitioners were
recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 16.12.2006 convicted and sentenced
the accused-petitioners for offences as mentioned earlier.
Aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the petitioners
preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which
came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 03.05.2007. Hence
this revision petition.
At the threshold, counsel for the petitioners does not
challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the
occurrence relates back to year 2005 and the petitioner No.1 has
so far suffered a sentence of about one year and three months
and petitioner No.2 has suffered a sentence of about seven
months, out of total sentence of three years' R.I. In such
circumstances, it is prayed that the substantive sentence awarded
to the accused-petitioners for the offence under Sections 457, 380
IPC may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.
On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-
petitioners. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any
occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused
petitioners 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-petitioners.
[2023:RJ-JD:43590] (4 of 4) [CRLR-415/2007]
It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the
year 2005 and the accused-petitioner No.1 has so far undergone a
period of about one year and three months incarceration and
petitioner No.2 has so far undergone a period of seven months
incarceration, out of total sentence of three years R.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-petitioners have 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 457, 380 IPC
and affirmed by the appellate court is reduced to the period
already undergone by them.
Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed.
While maintaining the petitioners' conviction and sentence for
offence under Sections 457, 380 IPC, the sentence awarded to
them for aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period
already undergone. The amount of fine is also hereby waived. The
petitioners are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds
stand discharged.
The record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
257-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
