Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sukh Dev vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:19908) on 24 April, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:19908]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 604/2006
Sukh Dev S/o Ganesh aged about 25 Years, R/o Kunwar, Police
Station Baneda, District Bhilwara. ----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan ----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Raghuveer Singh Chundawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Bhati, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
24/04/2025
1. Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the judgment dated 19.06.2006 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, District Bhilwara, in
Sessions Case No.4/2006 by which the learned Judge convicted
and sentenced the appellant as under:
Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in
default of fine
323 IPC 6 months' S.I. Rs.200/- 7 days' S.I.
326 IPC 3 years' S.I. Rs.1,000/- 1 month's S.I.
2. The period spent in police judicial custody shall be adjusted
in the original imprisonment.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 22.09.2005, complainant
Sayari Devi submitted a written report before SHO, Police Station
Baneda alleging that today at about 10 AM, her daughter-in-law
went to their field where Sukh Dev was cutting grass from their
field, when she stopped him he abused her & run behind her.
Thereafter, in evening at about 07:30 PM, when Bhanwar Lal, son
of Sayari Devi went to house of Sukh Dev to complain about the
incident he got angry and inflicted knife blow over hand of
[2025:RJ-JD:19908] (2 of 3) [CRLA-604/2006]
Bhanwar Lal and assaulted him. On this report, Police registered a
case against the accused appellant for the offence punishable
under Sections 323 & 307 of IPC and started investigation.
4. On completion of investigation, police filed challan against
the accused-appellant. Thereafter, the trial court framed charges
against the accused-appellant for offence under Sections 323, 326
& 307 of IPC, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 18 witnesses in support of its case and also exhibited some
documents. Thereafter, statement of the accused-appellant was
recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.
6. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 19.06.2006 convicted and sentenced
the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 323 & 326
of IPC. Hence, this criminal appeal.
7. At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-appellant
submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but
since the occurrence is related to the year 2005 and the accused
appellant has so far suffered a sentence of about 13 days out of
total sentence of three years' S.I., therefore, it is prayed that the
sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offence may
be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
8. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.
The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there is neither any
occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused
appellant nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said
case.
[2025:RJ-JD:19908] (3 of 3) [CRLA-604/2006]
9. 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-appellant.
10. Undisputedly, the occurrence relates back to year 2005 and,
the appellant has so far undergone a period of about 13 days
incarceration, out of total sentence of three years' S.I., and has
also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial.
Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the
appellant has 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 Section 323 & 326 of IPC is reduced to the
period already undergone by the appellant.
11. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining
the appellant's conviction for offence under Section 323 & 326 of
IPC, the sentence awarded to him for the said offence is hereby
reduced to the period already undergone. The fine amount is
hereby maintained. The amount of fine imposed by the trial Court,
if not already deposited by the petitioner, then two months' time is
hereby granted to deposit the fine amount before the trial Court.
In default of payment of fine, the petitioner shall undergo one
month's S.I. The petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His
bail bonds are discharged.
12. Pending applications, if any, stands decided.
13. Record, if received, be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
84-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
