Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ghewar Ram vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:17087) on 2 April, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:17087]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 734/2006
Ghewar Ram S/o Shri Lalaram, B/c Ghanchi, R/o Dhava, Tehsil &
District Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.R. Bhanwariya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, Dy.G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
02/04/2025
1. By way of filing the instant criminal revision petition, a
challenge has been made to the order dated 07.08.2006 passed
by the learned Sessions Judge Jalore (for short, "the appellate
Court") in Criminal Appeal No.19/2004 whereby the learned
appellate Court while rejecting the appeal filed against the
judgment of conviction dated 06.08.2004 passed by the learned
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Jalore, in Criminal Case No.52/2003
by which the learned trial Judge has convicted & sentenced the
petitioner as under:-
Offence Sentence Fine & default sentence
Sec. 279 IPC 6 months' SI Rs.200/- and in default of
payment of fine, one month's
S.I.
Sec. 304-A IPC 2 Years' SI Rs.500/- and in default of
payment of fine, two months'
S.I.
2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the
period spent in judicial custody shall be adjusted in the original
imprisonment.
[2025:RJ-JD:17087] (2 of 4) [CRLR-734/2006]
3. The gist of the prosecution story is that complainant
Masraram gave a written report to the Police to the effect that on
11.03.2003 at about 10 a.m. his daughter Rekha told him that the
bus bearing registration No.RJ-19-P-1655 driven by the petitioner
rashly and negligently, hit the mother of the complainant. As a
result of this accident, mother of the complainant succumbed to
injuries. On this report, the FIR No.21/2003 was lodged at
concerned Police Station, against the petitioner. After usual
investigation, charge-sheet came to be submitted against the
petitioner in the Court concerned.
4. The Learned Magistrate framed charge against the petitioner
for offences under Sections 279 & 304-A of IPC and upon denial of
guilt by the accused, commenced the trial. During the course of
trial, as many as seven witnesses were examined. Thereafter, an
explanation was sought from the accused-petitioner under Section
313 Cr.P.C. for which he denied the same. 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 279 & 304-A of IPC vide
judgment dated 06.08.2004 and sentenced him. Aggrieved by the
judgment of conviction, he preferred an appeal before the
Sessions Judge Jalore, which was dismissed vide judgment dated
07.08.2006. Both these judgments are under assail before this
Court in the instant revision petition.
5. Learned counsel Mr. Bhanwariya, 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
[2025:RJ-JD:17087] (3 of 4) [CRLR-734/2006]
and upheld by the learned appellate court, but at the same time,
he implores that the incident took place in the year 2003. He had
remained in jail for about one month after passing of the
judgment by the appellate Court. No other case has been reported
against him. He hails from a very poor family and belongs to the
weaker section of the society. He has been facing trial since the
year 2003 and he has languished in jail for some time, therefore,
a lenient view may be taken in reducing his sentence.
6. Learned Dy. Government Advocate 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 one
month and except the present one no other case has been
registered against him.
7. 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,
this court does not wish to interfere in the judgment of conviction.
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is maintained.
8. As far as the question of sentence is concerned, the
petitioner remained in jail for some time and he has been facing
the rigor for last 22 years. 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
[2025:RJ-JD:17087] (4 of 4) [CRLR-734/2006]
petitioner has suffered some time incarceration and the maximum
sentence imposed upon him is of two years 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.
9. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction dated 06.08.2004
passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Jalore, in
Criminal Case No.52/2003 and the judgment dated 07.08.2006
passed by the learned Sessions Judge Jalore, in Criminal Appeal
No.19/2004 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 justice. The fine amount is hereby
maintained. Two months' time is granted to deposit the fine before
the trial court. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner shall
undergo one month's simple imprisonment. The fine amount, if any,
already deposited by the petitioner shall be adjusted. The petitioner
is on bail. He need not to surrender. His bail bonds are cancelled.
10. The revision petition is allowed in part.
11. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
12. Record of the Courts below, if received, be sent back
forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
13-Ishan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
