Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gopal Lal @ Gopilal vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:44086) on 15 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:44086]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 351/2013
Gopal Lal @ Gopilal S/o Shri Roopaji, B/c Bheel, R/o Gangaguda,
PS Kelwada, District Rajsamand (Raj.)
(At present lodged in District Jail, Rajsamand)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Sarupariya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
15/12/2023
Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated
29.05.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rajsamand
(hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') in Criminal Appeal
No.103/2011 by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of
the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 08.04.2010 passed
by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kumbhalgarh
(hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Regular
Case No.247/2009, whereby, the learned trial court convicted and
sentenced the present petitioner as under :
Offence U/s 457 IPC : Two years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000/-,
in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months' S.I.
Offence U/s 380 IPC : One year's S.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000/-,
in default of payment of fine, to further two months' S.I.
Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
[2023:RJ-JD:44086] (2 of 4) [CRLR-351/2013]
Brief facts of the case are that on 09.10.2009, complainant
Shyamlal Vaishnav submitted a written report before Police Station
Kelwara to the effect that he is a 'Pujari' at Mateshwar Mahadev
Temple. In the intervening night of 08.10.2009, some unknown
persons unlawfully entered in the temple and committed theft. 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 six
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 08.04.2010 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 29.05.2013. Hence
this revision petition.
At the threshold, counsel for the petitioner does not
challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the
[2023:RJ-JD:44086] (3 of 4) [CRLR-351/2013]
occurrence relates back to year 2009 and the petitioner has so far
suffered a sentence of about three months, out of total sentence
of two years' S.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 2009 and the accused-petitioner has so far undergone a
period of about three months incarceration, out of total sentence
of two 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 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
[2023:RJ-JD:44086] (4 of 4) [CRLR-351/2013]
offence under Sections 457, 380 IPC, the sentence awarded to
him for aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period already
undergone. The fine imposed by the trial court is hereby
maintained. Three months' time is hereby granted to deposit the
fine, failing which the petitioner shall undergo two months' 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
251-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
