Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kashmir Singh And Ors vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:12088) on 4 March, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:12088]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 83/2009
1. Kashmir Singh S/o Teja Singh R/o Amarpura Thedi, P.S.
Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh.
2. Raju @ Raj Singh Singh S/o Jangir Singh R/o Amarpura
Thedi, P.S. Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh.
3. Preetam Singh S/o Teja Singh R/o Amarpura Thedi, P.S.
Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh.
4. Manjeet Singh S/o Gyan Singh R/o Pakki Kothi, P.S.
Hindumalkot, District Sriganganagar.
----Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kishan Bansal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Kumpawat, assistant to Mr.
Deepak Chowdhary, GA-cum-AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
04/03/2025
1. Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants
against the judgment dated 15.01.2009 passed by learned
Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.3,
Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.20/2008 by which the learned
Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants as under :
Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in
default of fine
Section 307, 3 years' S.I. Rs.2,000/- 3 months' S.I.
307/149 IPC
Section 326, 3 years' S.I. Rs.2,000/- 3 months' S.I.
326/149 IPC
Section 3 months' S.I. Rs.200/- 7 days' S.I.
323/149 IPC
[2025:RJ-JD:12088] (2 of 4) [CRLA-83/2009]
Section 148 IPC 1 year's S.I. Rs.500/- 15 days' 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. Brief facts of the case are that on 22.08.2007, complainant
Khajan Chand submitted a written report at Police Station
Hanumangarh inter alia alleging that at about 8 AM, the appellants
armed with deadly weapons came to his house. The appellants
started abusing complainant and his family members and
thereafter assaulted him and his family members with weapons.
Thereafter, some villagers came there and intervened and took the
injured persons to the Govt. hospital. On this report, Police
registered a case against the accused appellants and started
investigation.
4. 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
307/149, 326, 323/149 & 148 of IPC, who pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial.
5. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 12 witnesses in support of its case and also exhibited some
documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused-appellants were
recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. In defence, three witnesses
were examined.
6. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 15.01.2009 convicted and sentenced
[2025:RJ-JD:12088] (3 of 4) [CRLA-83/2009]
the appellants for the offences as aforesaid. Hence, this criminal
appeal.
7. 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 2007 and the accused
appellants No.1 to 3 have so far suffered a sentence of about 12
days & appellant No.4 has so far suffered a sentence of about 22
days, out of total sentence of three 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.
8. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants.
The learned Public Prosecutor 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.
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-appellants.
10. Undisputedly, the occurrence relates back to year 2007 and,
the appellants have so far undergone a considerable period of
incarceration, out of total sentence of three 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
[2025:RJ-JD:12088] (4 of 4) [CRLA-83/2009]
for offences under Sections 307, 326, 323/149 & 148 of IPC is
reduced to the period already undergone by the appellants.
11. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining
the appellants' conviction for offences under Sections 307, 326,
323/149 & 148 of 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. The amount
of fine imposed by the trial Court, if not already deposited by the
appellants, then 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.
12. Record, if received, be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
179-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
