Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mahipal And Ors vs State (2024:Rj-Jd:23595) on 23 May, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2024:RJ-JD:23595]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 939/2016
1. Mahipal S/o Shri Sita Ram, R/o Kanjar Colony, Pander
Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District Bhilwara.
2. Amar Chand S/o Shri Sita Ram R/o Kanjar Colony, Pander
Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District Bhilwara.
3. Dilip S/o Shri Sita Sita Ram R/o Kanjar Colony, Pander
Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District Bhilwara.
4. Smt. Sumitra W/o Shri Sita Ram, R/o Kanjar Colony,
Pander Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District
Bhilwara.
5. Smt Parvati W/o Shri Mahipal, R/o Kanjar Colony, Pander
Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District Bhilwara.
6. Pokhar S/o Shri Ugam R/o Kanjar Colony, Pander Police
Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District Bhilwara.
7. Smt. Radha Devi W/o Shri Tejmal R/o Kanjar Colony,
Pander Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District
Bhilwara.
8. Nirmal S/o Shri Pratap, R/o Kanjar Colony, Pander Police
Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District Bhilwara.
9. Kailash S/o Shri Ratan R/o Kanjar Colony, Pander Police
Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District Bhilwara.
10. Surendra S/o Shri Nandkishore, R/o Kanjar Colony,
Pander Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District
Bhilwara.
11. Parmeshwar S/o Shri Shaktiyan, R/o Kanjar Colony,
Pander Police Station Pander Tehsil Jahajpur District
Bhilwara.
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rakesh Matoria
Mr. O.P. Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anita Gehlot, PP assisted by
Mr. Avinash Godara
(Downloaded on 24/05/2024 at 09:12:12 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:23595] (2 of 5) [CRLA-939/2016]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
23/05/2024
1. Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants
against the judgment dated 04.10.2016 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Shahpura, District Bhilwara in Sessions
Case No.86/2009 by which the learned Judge convicted and
sentenced the appellants as under :
S.No. Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in
default of fine
1. 147 IPC 6 months' S.I. Rs.200/- 1 month S.I.
2. 452 IPC 2 years' S.I. Rs.1,000/- 2 months' S.I.
3. 332 IPC 1 year S.I. Rs.1,000/- 2 months' S.I.
4. 353 IPC 6 months' S.I. Rs.500/- 1 month S.I.
2. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the
period spent in judicial custody shall be adjusted in the original
imprisonment.
3. A letter dated 17.01.2024 has been received from learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Shahpura, District Bhilwara informing
appellant No.8 - Nirmal S/o Shri Pratap has passed away on
12.04.2023 and his death certificate has also been annexed along
with the letter. Hence, the criminal appeal is dismissed as abated
in respect of appellant No.8 - Nirmal S/o Shri Pratap.
4. Brief facts of the case are that on 08.06.2008, complainant
Chandra Prakash SHO, Police Station Pander submitted a written
report to the effect that at around 10:30 AM he along with
constable Kalu Ram, Vishram & Suresh Chandra was standing in
front of the Police Station Kanjar Colony, Pander. A tractor bearing
registration No.RJ06/RA-0873 was coming from Palasiya
[2024:RJ-JD:23595] (3 of 5) [CRLA-939/2016]
thereafter, it was stopped for checking and upon asking the driver
he told his name as Mahipal. Upon asking for documents of
tractor, he told that the said tractor is stolen and he has no
documents of the tractor. Thereafter, the tractor along with trolly
containing gravel was seized and the usual procedure was
commenced, and upon asking the tractor driver to sign and put a
thumb impression he started yelling and denied to sign and put
his thumb impression. Thereafter, the present petitioners
alongwith some other persons entered the Police Station and
started scuffling & pelting stones and took away the petitioner
No.1 - Mahipal. On this report, Police registered a case for
offences under Sections 147, 452, 332, 353, 224, 336 & 436 IPC
and Section 3 of PDPP Act against the accused appellants and
started investigation.
5. On completion of investigation, police filed challan against
the accused-appellants. Thereafter, the trial court framed charges
against the accused-appellants for offences under Sections 147,
452, 332, 353, 336 & 436 IPC, who pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial.
6. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 13 witnesses in support of its case and also exhibited 25
documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused-appellants were
recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.
7. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 04.10.2016 convicted and sentenced
the appellants for the offences as aforesaid. Hence, this criminal
appeal.
[2024:RJ-JD:23595] (4 of 5) [CRLA-939/2016]
8. 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 2008 and the accused
appellants viz., Mahipal, Amar Chand, Dilip, Smt. Sumitra, Smt.
Parvati, Pokhar, Smt. Radha Devi have so far suffered a sentence
of about seven days and accused appellants viz., Kailash &
Surendra have so far suffered a sentence of about two days and
accused appellant Parmeshwar has so far suffered a sentence of
about four days, out of total sentence of two years' S.I., therefore,
it is prayed that the sentence awarded to the appellants for the
aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already
undergone by them.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Undisputedly, the occurrence relates back to year 2008 and,
the appellants have so far undergone remained in judicial custody
for some time, out of total sentence of two years' S.I., 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
[2024:RJ-JD:23595] (5 of 5) [CRLA-939/2016]
for offences under Sections 147, 452, 332 & 353 IPC is reduced to
the period already undergone by the appellants.
12. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining
the appellants' conviction for offences under Sections 147, 452,
332 & 353 IPC, the sentence awarded to them for the said
offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The
fine imposed by the trial court is hereby maintained. Two months'
time is granted to deposit the fine amount before the trial Court.
In default of payment of fine, the appellants shall undergo one
month S.I. The appellants are on bail. They need not surrender.
Their bail bonds are discharged.
13. Pending applications, if any, shall stands disposed of.
14. Record, if received, be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
136-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
