Pawan Kumar vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:37605)
2023 Latest Caselaw 8935 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:37605]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 615/2003

Pawan Kumar s/o Satyanarain Agarwal, resident of Vinoba Basti,
Sri Ganganagar.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State of Rajasthan
                                                                  ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr.Bheemkant Vyas.
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr.Mukhtiyar Khan, P.P.



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

                                     ORDER

01/11/2023

This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with

401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment dated

8.7.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special

Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act Cases, Sriganganagar in Cr.Appeal No.19/2003

whereby while dismissing the appeal, the judgment dated

31.5.1997 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Sriganganagar in Cr.Original Case No.376/95 was modified and

the petitioner was convicted and sentenced as below:

Conviction for offences                               Sentences
under Sections:
408 IPC              One year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of

Rs.50,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further under undergo six months' simple imprisonment.

From the perusal of record of the case file, it is revealed that

the petitioner while working as munim, in the shop of the

[2023:RJ-JD:37605] (2 of 3) [CRLR-615/2003]

complainant was entrusted with an amount to the tune of

Rs.1,93,200/- for making purchase of sugar from Jeera Mandi,

Punjab. The petitioner had used an amount to the tune of

Rs.1,00,00/-, out of the amount entrusted to him. The petitioner

was tried for offences and sentenced as above vide judgment

dated 31.05.1997. The appeal preferred against judgment dated

31.5.1997 came be dismissed by the learned appellate court vide

judgment dated 8.7.2003, however the sentences awarded to the

petitioner were modified as mentioned above.

A perusal of the judgments impugned makes it evident that

the alleged incident happened in the year 1995 and the present

revision petition has remained pending since 2003.

Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner submitted that

the sentences so awarded to the revisionist-petitioner were

suspended by this Court, vide order dated 4.8.2003 passed in S.B.

Criminal Suspension of Sentences (Bail) Application No.167/2003.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner had undergone detention for some period and the case

is pending against him since 1995. Learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that the petitioner is facing agony of a long

protracted trial and therefore, without making any interference on

merits/conviction, the sentences awarded to the present

revisionist-petitioner may be substituted with the period of

sentences already undergone by him.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made on

behalf of the petitioner. However, he was not in a position to

dispute that the present revision petition is pending since 2003.

[2023:RJ-JD:37605] (3 of 3) [CRLR-615/2003]

This Court is conscious of judgments passed by Hon'ble the

Supreme Court of India in the cases of Alister Anthony Pareira

Vs. State of Maharashtra (2012) 2 SCC 648 and Haripada

Das Vs. State of W.B. (1998) 9 SCC 678 observing that there

is no straitjacket formula to sentence an accused on proof of

crime. It was further observed by Hon'ble the Apex Court that the

sentence that would meet the ends of justice depends on the facts

and circumstances of each case and it must be kept in mind the

gravity of the crime, motive for the crime, nature of the offence

and all other attendant circumstances.

In the light of aforesaid discussion and keeping in view the

limited prayer made on behalf of the revisionist-petitioner, the

present revision is partly allowed.

Accordingly, while maintaining the conviction of the

petitioner for the offence under Section 408 IPC, the sentences

awarded to him are reduced to the period already undergone by

him. The petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail

bonds stand discharged accordingly.

All pending applications stand disposed of.

Record of the case be sent back to the learned court below

forthwith.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 21-TarunGoyal/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)