Mala Ram And Ors vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:37183)
2023 Latest Caselaw 8898 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:37183]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 686/2002

1. Mala Ram S/o Kana Ram, B/c Bishnoi

2. Suja Ram @ Surjan Ram S/o Kana Ram, B/c Bishnoi

3. Ram Lal S/o Kana, B/c Bishnoi

4. Mangla Ram S/o Amra, B/c Bishnoi

5. Hari Ram S/o Harlal, B/c Bishnoi

6. Teja Ram S/o Koja Ram, B/c Bishnoi

7. Chena Ram S/o Juhara, B/c Luhar All R/o Lalpura, PS Chitalvana, District Jalore (At present lodged at Sub Jail, Bhinmal in the process of transfer to Central Jail, Udaipur)

----Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pravin Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Judgment

01/11/2023

Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners

challenging the judgment dated 17.08.2002 passed in Cr. Appeal

No.35/2000 by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhinmal

(hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') by which the

appellate court while dismissing the petitioners' appeal, upheld the

judgment dated 25.09.2000 passed in Cr. Case No.80/1998 by

learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Sanchor (hereinafter

referred to as 'the trial court') whereby, the learned trial court

court convicted and sentenced the present petitioners as under :

[2023:RJ-JD:37183] (2 of 4) [CRLR-686/2002]

Offence U/s 148 IPC : One Year's S.I.

Offence U/s 323/149 IPC : Three months' S.I. Offence U/s 324/149 IPC : One year's S.I. Offence U/s 325/149 IPC : Two years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo seven day's S.I.

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

Brief facts of the case are that on 04.12.1997, complainant

Surjan Ram lodged a report at Police Station Chitalvana alleging

inter-alia that on 04.12.1997 at about 1 O'clock, he along with

Haringa Ram, Smt. Dhanni and Bhera Ram were doing agricultural

work in their field. At that time, accused persons armed with

Dharia, Lathis and iron pipes came there and assaulted them.

Consequent to which, they received grievous injuries. On their

shouting, one Karna Ram and Kishan Lal came there and rescued

them.

On this report, Police registered a case for offence under

Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 307, 323 IPC against the petitioners

and started investigation.

After investigation, the police filed challan against the

petitioners for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324,

325 IPC. Thereafter, charges were framed by the learned trial

court against the petitioners, who pleaded not guilty and claimed

trial.

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many

as 13 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statements of

the accused-petitioners under section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded.

[2023:RJ-JD:37183] (3 of 4) [CRLR-686/2002]

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide

impugned judgment dated 25.09.2000 convicted and sentenced

the accused-petitioners for aforesaid offence.

Being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the

petitioners preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court,

which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 17.08.2002.

Hence, this revision petition against the conviction and sentence of

the accused-petitioners.

At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners

submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but

since the occurrence is related to the year 1997 and out of total

sentence of two years S.I., the accused petitioners have already

served six days of imprisonment, therefore, it is prayed that the

sentence awarded to the petitioners for the aforesaid offences

may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the

submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-

petitioners and 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.

Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 1997 and

the petitioners have so far undergone a period of six days in

custody out of two years of total sentence, so also suffered the

agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all

circumstances and the fact that the petitioners have remained

[2023:RJ-JD:37183] (4 of 4) [CRLR-686/2002]

behind the bars for some time, it will be just and proper, if the

sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Sections

148, 323/149, 324/149, 325/149 IPC and affirmed by the

appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone by the

petitioners.

Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. While

maintaining the petitioners' conviction for offence under Sections

148, 323/149, 324/149, 325/149 IPC, the sentence awarded to

them for the aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period

already undergone. The fine imposed by the trial court is also

waived. The petitioners are on bail. Their bail bonds stand

discharged.

The record of trial Court as well as the appellate court be

sent back forthwith.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 13-MS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)