Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shahabuddin vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:43588) on 13 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:43588]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 412/2007
Shahabuddin S/o Sh. Mohd., B/c Mohammedan, R/o Silmagra
Mohalla, Merta City, District Nagaur.
(Presently lodged in Sub-Jail, Balotra)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajathan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Shah
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP with
Mr. CP Marwan
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
13/12/2023
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 Sessions Judge, Balotra 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, in Regular
Criminal Case No.289/2005, whereby, the learned trial court
convicted the petitioner for offence under Section 411 IPC and
sentenced him to undergo four months' S.I. along with a fine of
Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo fifteen
days' S.I.
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
[2023:RJ-JD:43588] (2 of 3) [CRLR-412/2007]
committed theft of money, gold and silver ornaments etc. On this
report, the police registered the case against unknown accused
persons 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.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 16.12.2006 convicted and sentenced the
accused-petitioner for offence under Section 411 IPC.
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 nine days, out of total sentence of four months'
S.I. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the substantive sentence
awarded to the accused-petitioner for the offence under Section 411
IPC may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
[2023:RJ-JD:43588] (3 of 3) [CRLR-412/2007]
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 nine days incarceration, out of total sentence of four
months' 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 Section 411 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 Section 411 IPC, the sentence awarded to him for aforesaid
offence 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
258-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
