Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ramesh vs State (2024:Rj-Jd:49) on 2 January, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2024:RJ-JD:49] (1 of 5) [CRLA-492/2015]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 492/2015
Ramesh S/o Kishan Lal Meghwal, R/o Mayangar Colony,
Gulabpura, District Bhilwara.
(At present lodged in Sub-Jail Gulabpura, District Bhilwara)
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 510/2015
Bhanwar Lal S/o Nimba Ram Meghwal, R/o Mayangar Colony,
Gulabpura, District Bhilwara.
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ravindra Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
02/01/2024
Both the criminal appeals have arisen out of the same
judgment dated 26.05.2015, passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Gulabpura, District Bhilwara in Session Case
No.06/2013 and therefore they are being decided by this common
order.
By the judgment dated 26.05.2015, the learned trial court
acquitted the accused-appellants for offence under Section 307
[2024:RJ-JD:49] (2 of 5) [CRLA-492/2015]
IPC, but convicted and sentenced them for offence under Sections
341, 324, 324/34 IPC as under :
Both the Appellants : Offence U/s 341 IPC: One month's S.I
and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine, to further
undergo seven days' additional imprisonment.
Appellant Ramesh : Offence U/s 324 IPC : Three years' S.I.
and a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further
undergo six months' additional imprisonment.
Appellant Bhanwar Lal : Offence U/s 324/34 IPC : Three
years' S.I. and a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine,
to further undergo six months' additional imprisonment.
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Brief facts of the case are that on 05.02.2013, complainant
Nar Singh submitted a written report (Ex-P/1) before the Police
Station Gulabpura to the effect that on 02.02.2013 in the evening
at about 7 PM, accused Ramesh called his son Naresh
telephonically at his house. When his son Naresh reached at the
house of accused Ramesh, he started beating his son while using
abusive language. Accused Ramesh having knife in his hand,
stabbed the complainant's son in the stomach and other accused
persons also started beating the complainant's son Naresh. On
this report, Police registered a case against the accused persons
for offences under Sections 341, 324, 323 IPC and started
investigation.
On completion of investigation, police filed challan against
the accused persons including the appellants. Thereafter, the
charges for offence under Sections 307, 307/34, 341, 323 IPC
were framed by the trial court against the accused persons, who
pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
[2024:RJ-JD:49] (3 of 5) [CRLA-492/2015]
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as ten witnesses in support of its case and also exhibited some
documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused persons under
section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded. In defence, no witness was
examined, but statement of Dinesh was exhibited as Ex-D/1.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 26.05.2015 acquitted the co-accused
namely Sukhi Devi and Sita Devi and accused-appellants for
offence under Section 307 IPC but convicted and sentenced the
accused-appellants for the offences as aforesaid. Hence, this
criminal appeal.
It is pertinent to note here that the State preferred a
criminal leave to appeal being SB Cr. Leave to Appeal No.94/2016
before this Court against the acquittal of the accused persons
including the present appellants for offence under Section 307
IPC, which was dismissed by this Court by way of a detailed order
on 30.03.2017.
At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-appellants
submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but
since the occurrence is related to the year 2013 and the accused
appellant Ramesh has so far suffered a sentence of about one and
half years and appellant Bhanwar Lal has suffered a sentence of
more than three months, out of total sentence of three years' S.I.
and further, no role whatsoever has been assigned to accused-
appellant Bhanwarlal and Radiologist has also not been examined
by the prosecution and thus, the prosecution has failed to prove x-
ray report of the injured against the appellants, therefore, it is
prayed that the sentence awarded to the appellants for the
[2024:RJ-JD:49] (4 of 5) [CRLA-492/2015]
aforesaid offences 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 appellants.
The learned PP submitted that there is neither any occasion to
interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellants 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 trial court regarding
conviction of the accused-appellants.
Undisputedly, the occurrence relates back to year 2013 and
the leave to appeal preferred by the State against the acquittal of
the accused-appellants for offence under Section 307 IPC has
already been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 30.03.2017
and further, the appellants have so far undergone a sufficient period
of incarceration and have also suffered the mental agony and
trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all
circumstances and the fact that the appellants have remained
behind the bars for a considerable time, it will be just and proper
if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under
Sections 341, 324, 324/34 IPC is reduced to the period already
undergone by the appellants.
Accordingly, both the appeals are partly allowed. While
maintaining the appellants' conviction and sentence for offence
under Sections 341, 324, 324/34 IPC, the sentence awarded to
them is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The fine
imposed upon the appellant Bhanwar Lal is hereby waived and if
[2024:RJ-JD:49] (5 of 5) [CRLA-492/2015]
he has deposited the fine amount, the same may be returned to
him forthwith.
The fine imposed upon the appellant Ramesh for offence under
Section 324 IPC is hereby increased from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.5,000/-
and the fine imposed for offence under Section 341 IPC is hereby
maintained. Appellant Ramesh is granted three months' time to
deposit the fine amount of Rs.5,100/- before the trial court. In
default of payment of fine, the appellant Ramesh shall undergo two
months' simple imprisonment.
On depositing the fine amount by the appellant Ramesh, the
same shall be disbursed to the injured Naresh S/o Nar Singh
forthwith.
The appellants are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail
bonds stand discharged.
Record, if received, be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
55-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
