Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Chail Singh @ Mahendra Singh vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:23413) on 14 May, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:23413]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 441/2007
Chail Singh @ Mahendra Singh S/o Narain Singh R/o Parlu,
District Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Kumpawat, assistant to
Mr. Deepak Chowdhary, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
14/05/2025
1. Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner
challenging the judgment dated 16.05.2007 passed in Cr. Appeal
No.02/2005 by learned Sessions Judge, Barmer (hereinafter
referred to as 'the appellate court') by which the appellate court
while dismissing the petitioner's appeal, upheld the judgment
dated 11.12.2004 passed in Cr. Original Case No.155/2002 by
learned Judicial Magistrate, Balotra (hereinafter referred to as 'the
trial court') whereby, the learned trial court convicted the present
petitioner for offence as under :
Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in
default of fine
Section 452 IPC 2 years' RI Rs.1,000/- 2 months' SI
Section 4/25 of 6 months' RI Rs.500/- 1 month's SI
Arms Act
[2025:RJ-JD:23413] (2 of 4) [CRLR-441/2007]
Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the
period spent in police & judicial custody shall be adjusted in the
original imprisonment.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 05.10.2002, complainant
Sumerlal submitted a written report at P.S. Samdari inter alia
alleging that the accused came to his grocery shop and threatened
his partner Bheemaram to shut the shop. Thereafter, the accused
came to complainant's house with a sword and struck him with the
sword. Upon said information the Police registered an FIR against
the petitioner for the offence under Section 452 IPC & Section
4/25 of the Arms Act and commenced investigation.
3. On completion of investigation, the Police filed challan before
the concerned court. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charges
for offence under Section 452 of IPC & Section 4/25 of the Arms
Act against the petitioner who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 11 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited various
documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused-petitioner
under section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded.
5. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 11.12.2004 convicted and sentenced
the accused-petitioner for aforesaid offence.
6. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the
petitioners preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court,
which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 16.05.2007.
Hence, this revision petition against the conviction and sentence of
the accused-petitioner.
[2025:RJ-JD:23413] (3 of 4) [CRLR-441/2007]
7. At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner
submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but
since the occurrence is related to the year 2002 and out of total
sentence of two years' R.I., the accused petitioner has already
served about 10 days of imprisonment, therefore, it is prayed that
the sentence awarded to the petitioner for the aforesaid offence
may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
8. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-
petitioner and 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.
9. 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.
10. Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 2002 and
the petitioner has so far undergone a period of about 10 days in
custody out of one year of total sentence, so also suffered the
agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all
circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has remained
behind the bars for some time, it will be just and proper, if the
sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Section 452
IPC & Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and affirmed by the appellate
court is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner.
11. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. While
maintaining the petitioner's conviction for offence under Section
452 of IPC & Section 4/25 of the Arms Act, the sentence awarded
to him for the aforesaid offence is hereby reduced to the period
[2025:RJ-JD:23413] (4 of 4) [CRLR-441/2007]
already undergone. The fine amount is hereby waived. The
petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds are
discharged. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
12. The record of trial Court as well as the appellate court be
sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
25-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
