Mukesh vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7005 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:32070]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 961/2023

Mukesh S/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Chokunti
Naykan Mohalla Bikaner Raj. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail
Bikaner)
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Laxmi Narayan Suthar S/o Jethmal Ji Suthar, R/o Naya
         Shahar Pabubari Bikaner Raj.
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)               :     Mr. Ashok Kumar
For Respondent(s)               :     Mr. Anish Bhurat, PP



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                          Order

DATE OF ORDER                                :::                      11/09/2023
BY THE COURT:-

1. By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition

challenge has been made to the judgment dated 18.05.2023

passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bikaner in

Criminal Appeal No.24/2020 whereby the learned Judge affirmed

the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

24.11.2014 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner in

Criminal Regular Case No.58/2014; whereby the petitioner has

been convicted as under:-

Offence for          which Substantive                      Fine and default sentence
convicted                  sentence
Section 457 IPC                     Three years' SI         Fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of
                                                            payment of fine, additional simple
                                                            imprisonment of six months.
Section 380 IPC                     One Year's S.I.         Fine of Rs.500/- and in default of
                                                            payment of fine to undergo simple
                                                            imprisonment of Three months.





 [2023:RJ-JD:32070]                   (2 of 5)                    [CRLR-961/2023]


Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and                     the

period spent in judicial custody shall be adjusted in the original

imprisonment.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 20.02.2014,

complainant Laxmi Narayan Suthar lodged a written report

(Ex.P/1) alleging inter alia that he was running a garage i.e. M/s

Laxmi Motor Works, Bikaner which was situated opposite Green

Hotel, Bikaner. On 19.02.2014 in the night after shutting down the

shop, he went his home and in the next morning i.e. 20.02.2014

when he went to open his garage, he saw that lock of the shop

was broken down and foot-prints of 2-3 persons were there. On

the basis of the aforesaid, an FIR No.52/2014 under Sections 457

and 380 IPC came to be lodged at the Police Station Kolgate,

District Bikaner at the instance of the complainant. After usual

investigation, charge-sheet came to be submitted against the

petitioner along with two other persons under Sections 457 & 380

of the IPC.

3. The Learned Magistrate framed charge against the petitioner

and upon denial of guilt by the accused, commenced the trial.

During the course of trial, as many as 6 witnesses were examined

and certain documents were exhibited. Thereafter, an explanation

was sought from the accused-petitioner under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

and then, after hearing the learned counsel for the accused

petitioner and meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned

Trial Judge has convicted the accused for offence under Sections

457 & 380 of the IPC vide judgment dated 24.11.2014. Aggrieved

[2023:RJ-JD:32070] (3 of 5) [CRLR-961/2023]

by the judgment of conviction, the present petitioner preferred an

appeal before the Sessions court vide judgment dated 18.05.2023

affirmed the judgment passed by the trial court. Both these

judgments are under assail before this court in the instant revision

petition.

4. Learned counsel Mr. Ashok Kumar, representing the

petitioner, at the outset submits that he does not dispute the

finding of guilt and the judgment of conviction passed by the

learned trial court and affirmed by the learned appellate court, but

at the same time, he implores that the incident took place in the

year 2014. He had remained in jail for some time during the

proceedings of trial and thereafter, he is in custody since

18.05.2023, i.e. from the date of judgment passed in appeal. No

other case has been registered against him. He belongs to a very

poor family and is a weaker person of the society. He was a

young boy on the date of incident and presently he is 30 years

old. He is facing trial since the year 2014 and he has languished in

jail for about four and half months, therefore, a lenient view may

be taken in reducing his sentence.

5. Learned public prosecutor though opposed the submissions

made on behalf of the petitioner but does not refute the fact that

the petitioner has remained behind the bars for more than four

and half months and no other case has been registered against

the petitioner.

6. Since the revision petition against conviction is not pressed

and after perusing the material, nothing is noticed which requires

interference in the finding of guilt reached by learned trial court,

[2023:RJ-JD:32070] (4 of 5) [CRLR-961/2023]

this court does not wish to interfere in the judgment of conviction.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is maintained.

7. As far as the question of sentence is concerned, it is true

that the petitioner is behind the bars since last four and half

months. He has been shown to be indulged in only one other case,

which is for the offence under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC.

Thus, in the light of the judgments passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the cases of Haripada Das Vs. State of West

Bangal reported in (1998) 9 SCC 678 and Alister Anthony

Pareira vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2012 2 SCC 648

and considering the circumstances of the case, age of the

petitioner, his status in the society and the fact that the case is

pending since a pretty long time for which the petitioner has

suffered more than four and half months' incarceration out of the

sentence of one year imposed upon him as well as the fact that he

faced financial hardship and had to go through mental agony, this

court deems it appropriate to reduce the sentence to the term of

imprisonment that the petitioner has already undergone till date.

8. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction dated 24.11.2014

passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner in Criminal Case

No.58/2014 as well as the judgment of appeal passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.2, Bikaner in Criminal

Appeal No.24/2020 dated 18.05.2023 are affirmed but the

quantum of sentence awarded by the learned Trial Court is

modified to the extent that the sentence he has undergone till

date would be sufficient and justifiable to serve the interest of

[2023:RJ-JD:32070] (5 of 5) [CRLR-961/2023]

justice. The petitioner is in judicial custody. He shall be released

forthwith if not wanted in any other case.

9. The revision petition is allowed in part.

10. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.

11. Record be sent back to the trial court.

(FARJAND ALI),J 36-Mamta/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)