Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kalu Ram vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:22081) on 7 May, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:22081]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 135/2006
Kalu Ram S/o Shri Hazari Ram, Aged About 44 years, Resident of
Ward No.3, Prem Nagar Anoopgarh, District Sriganganagar,
Rajasthan.
(At present lodged in Jail in Sriganganagar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gaurav Khatri
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG
Mr. K.S. Kumpawat, AAAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
07/05/2025
1. Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners
against the judgment dated 16.01.2006 passed in Cr. Appeal
No.42/2005 by learned Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar, by which the
appellate court dismissed the petitioners' appeal and upheld the
judgment dated 18.03.2005 passed in Regular Cr. Case No.30/2001
by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sriganganagar by which
the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioners as
under:-
Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in default of
fine
Sec.457 IPC 2 years' R.I. Rs.500/- 1 month's S.I.
Sec.380 IPC 2 years' R.I. Rs.500/- 1 month's S.I.
Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 17.11.2000, the complainant
Jasvindra Pal Singh, submitted a written report at Police Station
[2025:RJ-JD:22081] (2 of 3) [CRLR-135/2006]
Jawahar Nagar, Sriganganagar to the effect his motorcycle bearing
No.RJ-13-4M-6646 was locked and parked in his house, but in the
morning about 04:30 A.M., the motorcycle was not found there as it
was stolen by some unknown person. On the said report, an FIR was
registered and after usual investigation, charge-sheet came to be
submitted against the present-petitioner in the Court concerned.
3. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charges against the
petitioner for offence under Section 457 & 380 of IPC, who pleaded
not guilty and claimed trial.
4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 05 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited various
documents. Thereafter, statement of the accused-petitioner under
section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded.
5. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 18.03.2005 convicted and sentenced the
accused-petitioner for aforesaid offence.
6. Being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the
petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court,
which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 16.01.2006.
Hence, this revision petition.
7. At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner
submits that they do not challenge the finding of conviction but since
the occurrence is related to the year 2000 and out of total sentence
of two years' R.I., the accused petitioner has already served about
five months 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.
[2025:RJ-JD:22081] (3 of 3) [CRLR-135/2006]
8. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General
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 2000 and
the petitioners have so far undergone a period of about five months
in custody out of two years 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 Sections 457 & 380 of
IPC 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 Sections 457
& 380 of IPC, the sentence awarded to him for the aforesaid offences
is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The fine imposed
by the trial court is hereby waived, if not already deposited by him.
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
10-GKaviya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
