Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hema Ram vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:43584) on 13 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:43584]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 514/2008
Hema Ram S/o Shri Gangaram, B/c Jat, R/o Surpura Khurd, PS
Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur.
(At present lodged in Sub-Jail, Bilara, Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----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 petitioner, has expired.
Thus, this Court appoints Mr. Pradeep Shah, Adv. as Amicus
curiae to represent case of the petitioner before this Court.
Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioner 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.07/2007 by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of
the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 16.12.2006 passed
by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Balotra (hereinafter referred to
as 'the trial court') in Criminal Original Case No.289/2005,
[2023:RJ-JD:43584] (2 of 4) [CRLR-514/2008]
whereby, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the
present petitioner as under :
Offence U/s 457 IPC : Three years' R.I. and a fine of
Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further undergo one
month's S.I.
Offence U/s 380 IPC : Two years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.500/-, in
default of payment of fine, further fifteen days' S.I.
Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Brief facts of the case are that on 23.02.2005, complainant
Mahant Datt Narayangiri submitted a written report before Police
Station Samdari to the effect that in the intervening night of
16.02.2005, 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 petitioner.
On completion of investigation, the police filed challan
against the accused persons including the petitioner. 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 eleven
witnesses and also exhibited various documents. Thereafter,
statements of the accused persons including the petitioner were
recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.
[2023:RJ-JD:43584] (3 of 4) [CRLR-514/2008]
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 16.12.2006 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 03.05.2007. 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 2005 and the petitioner has so far
suffered a sentence of about eight months and seventeen days,
out of total sentence of three years' R.I. In such circumstances, it
is prayed that the substantive sentence awarded to the accused-
petitioner for the offence under Sections 457, 380 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 2005 and the accused-petitioner has so far undergone a
period of about eight months and seventeen days incarceration,
[2023:RJ-JD:43584] (4 of 4) [CRLR-514/2008]
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-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 457, 380 IPC and affirmed by the appellate court is
reduced to the period already undergone by him.
Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed.
While maintaining the petitioner's conviction and sentence for
offence under Sections 457, 380 IPC, the sentence awarded to
him for aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period already
undergone. The amount of fine is also hereby waived. 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
261-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
