Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ridemal Ram vs State M (2025:Rj-Jd:25399) on 23 May, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:25399]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 593/1996
Ridemal Ram S/o Tikmaram, R/o Sarnu, P.S. Sandhari, District
Barmer, Raj.
----Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Mahesh Thanvi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA cum AAG
with Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
23/05/2025
Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the judgment dated 14.11.1996 passed by learned
Session Judge, Balotra in Session Case No.24/1995 by which the
learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:
S.No. Offence U/s Sentence Fine Sentence in
default of fine
1. 354 IPC 6 months' RI Rs.250/- 2 months' SI
2. 376/511 IPC 5 years' SI Rs.500/- 2 months' SI
3. 323 IPC 1 month SI - -
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Brief facts of the case are that on 12.10.1996, complainant
Dauram submitted a written report at Police Station Sindhari,
stating that on 11.10.1996, his younger sister Moni was grazing
cows in the pasture land when the accused-appellant Ridemal
Ram, approached her. He allegedly threw her to the ground and
attempted to commit rape. When Moni screamed for help, two
[2025:RJ-JD:25399] (2 of 3) [CRLA-593/1996]
passersby, Kalu Ram Jat and Ganga Ram Jat, heard her cries and
rushed to the spot, upon which the accused-appellant fled in the
direction of Bhakhar. During the scuffle, Ridemal Ram bit Moni's
right cheek, resulting in the loss of her silver earring and gold
nose-ring, which could not be recovered. On the basis of this
report, a case was registered and after investigation, police filed
challan against the accused-appellant. Thereafter, the charges for
offence under Sections 354, 376/511 and 323 IPC were framed by
the trial court against the accused-appellant, who pleaded not
guilty and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 07 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statement of the
accused appellant was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 14.11.1996 convicted and sentenced
the accused-appellant for the offences as aforesaid. Hence, this
criminal appeal.
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 1996 and the accused
appellant has so far suffered a sentence of about two months, out of
total sentence of five years SI, therefore, it is prayed that the
sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offences may
be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
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
[2025:RJ-JD:25399] (3 of 3) [CRLA-593/1996]
interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellant 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 trial court regarding
conviction of the accused-appellant.
Undisputedly, the occurrence relates back to year 1996 and
the appellant has so far undergone a period of about two months
incarceration, out of total sentence of five years SI, 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 period,
it will be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court
for offence under Sections 354, 376/511 and 323 IPC is reduced
to the period already undergone by the appellant.
Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining
the appellant's conviction and sentence for offence under Sections
354, 376/511 and 323 IPC, the sentence awarded to him for the
said offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone.
The amount of fine imposed by the trial court is hereby maintained.
Two months' time is granted to the appellant to deposit the fine
amount imposed by the trial court, if not already deposited. In
default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo one month's
simple imprisonment. The appellant is on bail. He need not
surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged.
Record, if received, be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
73-mSingh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
