Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rajendra Singh And Ors vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:21994)
2025 Latest Caselaw 468 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 468 Raj
Judgement Date : 7 May, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rajendra Singh And Ors vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:21994) on 7 May, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:21994]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 653/2003

1. Rajendra Singh S/o Shri Bhola Singh, R/o Faridsar, P.S. Kesri
Singhpur, Tehsil Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar
2. Kanta Singh S/o Shri Jogendra Singh, R/o Faridsar, P.S. Kesri
Singhpur, Tehsil Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar
3. Nattha Singh S/o Baldeo Singh, R/o Faridsar, P.S. Kesri
Singhpur, Tehsil Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar
[Lodged at Sub Jail Karanpur in the process to transfer to Central
Jail, Sri Ganganagar]
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
The State of Rajasthan, through PP
                                                                   ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Shyam S. Khatri
                                  Mr. Talat Bari
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA cum AAG
                                  with Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Judgment

07/05/2025

Learned AAG has submitted a report dated 20.04.2025

received from the concerned Police Station informing this Court

that the petitioner No.1 - Rajendra Singh has expired on

06.09.2020. The death certificate annexed is hereby taken on

record.

Hence, the present criminal revision petition stands

dismissed as abated qua the petitioner No.1.

So far as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, the present

criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against

the judgment dated 18.07.2003 passed by learned Additional

[2025:RJ-JD:21994] (2 of 4) [CRLR-653/2003]

Session Judge, Shreekaranpur, District Sri Ganganagar, in Criminal

Appeal No.18/2003 whereby the learned appellate court affirmed the

conviction and sentence vide judgment dated 29.04.1999 passed by the

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate & Civil Judge [Senior

Division], Shreekaranpur, District Sri Ganganagar in Criminal Case

No.61/1998 by which the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced

the petitioners as under:-

S.No.      Offence        Sentence                Fine           Sentence        in
                                                                 default of fine
  1.    120-B of IPC 4 years' RI                Rs.100/-            2 months' RI
  2.    384 of IPC      3 years' RI             Rs.100/-            2 months' RI
  3.    387 of IPC      4 years' RI             Rs.100/-            2 months' RI

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

Brief facts of the case are that on 07.01.1998, the

complainant Baldeo Raj received a ransom letter demanding

Rs.4,00,000/-, with a threat that his son would be harmed if the

amount was not paid by 10.01.1998 near Faridsar Bus Stand.

Baldeo Raj handed over the letter to the SHO, Police Station, Kesri

Singhpur. Based on this information, the police laid a trap and

apprehended the present-petitioners who came to collect the

ransom. During the interrogation, the accused-petitioners

confessed to having written the ransom letter. Later on, the police

registered a case against the petitioners and commenced the

investigation.

On completion of investigation, police filed challan against

the accused-petitioners. Thereafter, the charges for offence under

Sections 120-B, 384 & 387 of IPC were framed by the trial court

against the accused-petitioners, who pleaded not guilty and

claimed trial.

[2025:RJ-JD:21994] (3 of 4) [CRLR-653/2003]

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many

as 13 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statement of the

accused petitioner was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide

impugned judgment dated 29.04.1999 convicted and sentenced

the accused-petitioners for the offence under Sections 120-B, 384

& 387 of IPC. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the

accused-petitioners preferred an appeal against the conviction and

sentence before learned Additional Session Judge, Shreekaranpur,

District Sri Ganganagar, whereby the appellate court affirmed the

conviction and sentence vide judgment dated 18.07.2003 . Hence, this

criminal revision petition.

At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners

submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but

since the occurrence is related to the year 1998 and the accused

petitioner No.2 - Kanta Singh has so far suffered a sentence for a

period of 3 months and 18 days and similarly accused-petitioner

No.3 - Nattha Singh has so far suffered a sentence for a period of

2 months and 14 days including remission, out of total sentence of

four years' R.I., therefore, it is prayed that the sentence awarded

to the petitioners for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the

period already undergone by them.

Learned Advocate General opposed the submissions made by

the learned counsel for the petitioners. The learned AAG

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.

[2025:RJ-JD:21994] (4 of 4) [CRLR-653/2003]

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-petitioners.

Undisputedly, the occurrence relates back to year 1998 and,

the petitioners have so far undergone for certain period of

incarceration including remission, out of total sentence of four years'

R.I., and has also suffered the mental agony and trauma of

protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and

the facts that the petitioners 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 Sections 120-B, 384 & 387 is

reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioners.

Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed.

While maintaining the petitioners' conviction for offence under

Sections 120-B, 384 & 387 of IPC, the sentence awarded to him

for the said offences is hereby reduced to the period already

undergone. The fine amount imposed by the Court below is hereby

waived if not already deposited by the petitioners. The petitioners

are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bond stands

discharged. Pending applications, if any, also stand decided.

Record, if received, be sent back forthwith.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 2-mSingh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter