Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Babulal And Ors vs State (2024:Rj-Jd:11012) on 5 March, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2024:RJ-JD:11012]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 510/2004
1. Babulal S/o Ram Kishan R/o Chak 26 PBN, Tehsil Pilibanga,
District Hanumangarh.
2. Ramkishan S/o Mokhamaram R/o Chak 26 PBN, Tehsil
Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh.
3. Jagdish S/o Ramkishan R/o Chak 26 PBN, Tehsil Pilibanga,
District Hanumangarh. ----Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan ----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Gill
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
05/03/2024
The present criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants
challenging the judgment dated 18.05.2004 passed by learned
Sessions Judge, District Hanumangarh (hereinafter referred to as
'the trial court') in Sessions Case No.34/2004 by which the trial
court convicted and sentenced the appellants as under :
Offence U/s 498-A IPC : Three years' S.I. and fine of Rs.200/-
and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days' S.I.
Offence U/s 323 IPC : Six months' S.I.
Both the sentences were ordered to run concurently.
Brief facts of the case are that on 05.12.2002, complainant
Vidhya Devi filed a complaint before Police Station Pilibanga,
Hanumangarh inter-alia alleging therein that her marriage was
solemnized with appellant No.1-Babulal about three years ago. At
the time of marriage, certain dowry articles were given by the
parents of the complainant. But after some time of marriage, her
husband and in-laws started harassing the complainant mentally
and physically for bringing less dowry and also physically tortured
[2024:RJ-JD:11012] (2 of 3) [CRLA-510/2004]
her. On 01.12.2002, appellant No.3-Jagdish (brother in-law of the
complainant) also molested the complainant and thereafter, she
was ousted from her matrimonial home.
On this report, Police registered the FIR No.431/2002 and
started investigation. On completion of investigation, challan was
filed against the appellants for offences under Section 498-A, 323
& 376 IPC.
Thereafter, charges were framed by the learned trial court
against the appellants, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 11 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statement of the
accused-appellants under section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded. In
defence, one witness Devilal was examined by the appellants.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 18.05.2004 convicted and sentenced
the accused-appellants for aforesaid offences.
At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-appellants
does not challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted
that the occurrence relates back to year 2002 and the appellant
Nos.1 & 2 have so far suffered 10 days of sentence and appellant
No.3 has suffered about 18 days of sentence, out of total sentence
of three years' S.I. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the
sentence awarded to the accused-appellants for the offences
under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC 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 accused-
appellants. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any
[2024:RJ-JD:11012] (3 of 3) [CRLA-510/2004]
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.
It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the
year 2002 and the accused-appellant Nos.1 & 2 have so far
suffered 10 days of sentence and appellant No.3 has suffered
about 18 days sentence, out of total sentence of three years' S.I.
and so also suffered the agony and trauma of protracted trial.
Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the
accused-appellants have remained behind the bars for
considerable time, it will be just and proper if the sentence
awarded by the trial court for offences under Sections 498A & 323
IPC is reduced to the period already undergone by them.
Accordingly, the criminal appeal is partly allowed. While
maintaining the appellants' conviction for offences under Sections
498A & 323 IPC, the sentence awarded to them for aforesaid
offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The
amount of fine of Rs.200/- imposed upon each appellant by the
trial Court is also waived. The appellants are on bail. They need
not to surrender. Their bail bonds stand discharged.
The record of the trial Court be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
210-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
