Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Badrinarayan And Ors vs State (2024:Rj-Jd:10495) on 1 March, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2024:RJ-JD:10495]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1031/2008
1. Badrinarayan S/o Rukmal aged about 60 years, R/o Bugiya,
P.S. Vijay Nagar, Dist. Sriganganagar.
2. Dilipkumar S/o Udaram aged about 30 years, R/o Bugiya,
P.S. Vijay Nagar, Dist. Sriganganagar.
3. Prakash @ Omprakash S/o Govindram aged about 46 years,
R/o Bugiya, P.S. Vijay Nagar, Dist. Sriganganagar.
4. Bhupendra Kumar S/o Udaram aged about 36 years, R/o
Ward No.10, Jaitsar, P.S. Vijay Nagar, Dist. Sriganganagar.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Kirti Pareek
Mr. N.L. Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
01/03/2024
Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners
challenging the judgment dated 17.09.2008 passed in Cr. Appeal
No.14/2005 by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar
District Sriganganagar (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate
court') by which the appellate court while dismissing the
petitioners' appeal, upheld the judgment dated 03.03.2005 passed
in Cr. Case No.216/2002 by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,
Shri Vijaynagar, District Sriganganagar (hereinafter referred to as
'the trial court') whereby, the learned trial court convicted the
present petitioners for offence under Section 16/54(A)(C)(D) of
Rajasthan Excise Act and sentenced each of them to undergo two
[2024:RJ-JD:10495] (2 of 4) [CRLR-1031/2008]
years' R.I. and imposed a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default of
payment of fine, to further undergo four months' S.I.
Brief facts of the case are that while investigating in another
matter, on 04.01.2002, Shri Ram Pratap, SHO, PS Sri Vijaynagar
reached at the field of one Udaram and where he found the
present petitioners preparing country-made liquor on a 'Bhatti'
without any permit or licence. After collecting the samples of
country-made liquor and on completion of usual procedure, the
Police arrested all the petitioners and registered a case against
them for offence under Section 16/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act and
commenced investigation.
On completion of investigation, the Police filed challan before
the concerned court. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charges
for offence under Section 16/54(A)(C)(D) of Excise Act against the
petitioners, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 8 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statements of the
accused-petitioners under section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded. In
defence, seven witnesses were examined.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 03.03.2005 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 17.09.2008.
Hence, this revision petition against the conviction and sentence of
the accused-petitioners.
[2024:RJ-JD:10495] (3 of 4) [CRLR-1031/2008]
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 2002 and out of total
sentence of two years' R.I., the accused petitioners have already
served about fifteen 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 2002 and
the petitioners have so far undergone a period of about fifteen
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 behind the bars for some time, it will be just and proper,
if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under
Section 16/54(A)(C)(D) of Excise Act 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 Section
[2024:RJ-JD:10495] (4 of 4) [CRLR-1031/2008]
16/54(A)(C)(D) of Excise Act, 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 hereby
maintained. Three months' time is granted to deposit the fine
amount before the trial Court. In default of payment of fine, the
petitioners shall undergo two months' S.I. The petitioners are on
bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are discharged.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
The record of trial Court as well as the appellate court be
sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
250-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
