Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dana Ram vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:14744) on 19 March, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:14744]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 793/2007
Dana Ram S/o Rahing Ram, B/c Patel, R/o Bhavari, PS Rohat,
District Pali. (Lodged at District Jail, Pali)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. RS Chouhan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Bhati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
19/03/2025
Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated
08.08.2007 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pali (hereinafter
referred to as 'the appellate court') in Criminal Appeal No.59/2006
by which the appellate court partly allowed the appeal of the
petitioner and acquitted the petitioner from offence under Sections
324, 451 IPC and convicted and sentenced him for offence under
Section 447 IPC instead of Section 451 IPC, while maintaining his
conviction and sentence for offence under Section 326, 323 IPC,
as awarded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali in Cr.
Original Case No.26/2004 vide judgment dated 01.08.2006. The
details of the conviction and sentence of the petitioner as awarded
by the appellate court are as under :
[2025:RJ-JD:14744] (2 of 4) [CRLR-793/2007]
S.No. Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in
default of fine
1. Sec. 326 IPC 3 years RI Rs.500/- 2 months SI
2. Sec. 447 IPC 1 month SI Rs.100/- 7 days SI
3. Sec. 323 IPC 3 month RI - -
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Brief facts of the case are that on 04.11.2003, Amar Singh
submitted a written report on behalf of the complainant Jai Singh
before the Police Station to the effect that the accused-petitioner
assaulted the complainant Jai Singh and his wife with lathi and
axe. On the said report, FIR was registered against the accused
petitioner and investigation commenced.
On completion of investigation, the police filed challan
against the accused-petitioner. Thereafter, the trial court framed
charges against the accused petitioner for offences under Sections
452, 354, 326, 324, 323 IPC, who pleaded not guilty and claimed
trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 16 witnesses and exhibited certain documents in support of its
case. Thereafter, statement of the accused petitioner was recorded
under section 313 Cr.P.C. In defence, three witnesses were
examined.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 01.08.2006 convicted and sentenced
the accused-petitioners for offences under Sections 451, 326, 324,
323 IPC.
[2025:RJ-JD:14744] (3 of 4) [CRLR-793/2007]
Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the
petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court,
which came to be partly allowed vide judgment dated 08.08.2007
and the appellate court acquitted the petitioner from offences
under Sections 324, 451 IPC and convicted and sentenced him for
offence under Section 447 IPC instead of Section 451 IPC, while
maintaining his conviction and sentence for offence under Sections
326 & 323 IPC as awarded by the trial court. Hence, this revision
petition.
At the threshold, counsel for the petitioner does not
challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the
occurrence relates back to year 2003 and the petitioner has so far
suffered a sentence of about 19 days, out of total sentence of
three years SI. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the
substantive sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner for the
offence under Sections 326, 447, 323 IPC may be reduced to the
period already undergone by him.
On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-
petitioner. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any
occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused
petitioner 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 courts below regarding
conviction of the accused-petitioner.
[2025:RJ-JD:14744] (4 of 4) [CRLR-793/2007]
It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the
year 2003 and the accused-petitioner has so far undergone a
period of 19 days incarceration, out of total sentence of three
years S.I., and so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of
protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and
the fact that the accused-petitioner has remained behind the bars
for considerable time, it will be just and proper if the sentence
awarded by the trial court and modified by the appellate court for
offence under Sections 326, 447, 323 IPC is reduced to the period
already undergone by him.
Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed.
While maintaining the petitioner's conviction for offence under
Sections 326, 447, 323 IPC, the sentence awarded to him for
aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period already
undergone. The amount of fine is waived. The petitioner is on bail.
He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged.
The record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
29-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
