Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nayeem And Anr vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:44007) on 15 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:44007]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 691/2004
1. Nayeem S/o Gaffur Khan Musalman
2. Faim @ Kayum S/o Gaffur Khan Musalman
Both R/o Khachrod, District Ujjain (M.P.)
(Presently lodged in Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Bathi
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 petitioners challenging the judgment dated
02.09.2004 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in
Criminal Appeal No.32/2004 by which the appellate court dismissed
the appeal of the petitioners and upheld the judgment dated
10.08.2004 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Pratapgarh, in Cr. Regular Case No.730/2003, whereby,
the learned trial court convicted the petitioners for offence under
Section 379/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo two years' R.I.
each along with a fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine,
to further undergo one month's S.I.
Brief facts of the case are that on 04.09.2003, complainant
Ramnarayan Kumawat submitted a written report at Police Station
Pratapgarh to the effect that some unknown persons stole his red
color motorcycle Yamaha bearing registration No.RJ-35-M-0699,
which was parked outside the office of Panchayat Samiti, Pratapgarh.
[2023:RJ-JD:44007] (2 of 3) [CRLR-691/2004]
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-petitioners.
On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against
the accused-petitioners for offence under Section 379/34 IPC.
Thereafter, the charges of the case were framed against the accused-
petitioners, who denied the charges and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined six
witnesses and also exhibited some documents. Thereafter,
statements of the accused-petitioners were recorded under section
313 Cr.P.C.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 10.08.2004 convicted and sentenced the
accused-petitioners for offence under Section 379/34 IPC.
Aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the petitioners
preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which came
to be dismissed vide judgment dated 02.09.2004. 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 2003 and the petitioners have so far suffered a
sentence of more than one year, out of total sentence of two years'
R.I. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the substantive sentence
awarded to the accused-petitioners for the offence under Section
379/34 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-
[2023:RJ-JD:44007] (3 of 3) [CRLR-691/2004]
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.
It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the
year 2003 and the accused-petitioners have so far undergone a
period of more than one year incarceration, out of total sentence of
two 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 Section 379/34 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 Section 379/34 IPC, the sentence awarded to them for
aforesaid offence 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
149-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
