Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Deepak vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24646) on 21 May, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:24646]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1272/2024
Deepak S/o Shri Choru Lal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Harijano Ki
Badi Guwad, Bikaner. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail,
Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Manju Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Bhati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
21/05/2025
1. Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner
challenging the judgment dated 27.06.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal
No.24/2023 by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bikaner
(hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') by which the
appellate court while dismissing the petitioner's appeal, upheld the
judgment dated 24.08.2023 passed in Criminal Case
No.2077/2021 by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') whereby, the
learned trial court convicted and sentenced the present petitioner
as under:-
Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in
default of fine
Section 457 IPC 2 years' R.I. Rs.1,000/- 15 days' S.I.
Section 380 IPC 2 years' R.I. Rs.1,000/- 15 days' S.I.
[2025:RJ-JD:24646] (2 of 4) [CRLR-1272/2024]
2. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the
period spent in judicial custody shall be adjusted in the original
imprisonment.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 06.01.2021, complainant
Deepak Bhojak submitted a written report before SHO, Police
Station Kotgate to the extent that when he reached the temple at
about 06.30 AM, he did not find the lock on the back gate of the
temple. Thereafter, upon information about theft at temple, two
Police personnel came to the temple and found some silver
jewellery and cash stolen. On this report, Police registered a case
and started investigation.
4. On completion of investigation, the Police filed challan before
the concerned court. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charges
for offences under Sections 457, 380 & 411 of IPC against the
petitioner, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 7 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited certain
documents. Thereafter, statement of the accused-petitioner under
section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded.
6. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 24.06.2023 convicted and sentenced
the accused-petitioner for aforesaid offence.
7. Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the
petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court,
which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 27.06.2024.
Hence, this revision petition against the conviction and sentence of
the accused-petitioner.
[2025:RJ-JD:24646] (3 of 4) [CRLR-1272/2024]
8. 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 2021 and out of total
sentence of two years' R.I., the accused petitioner has already
served total period of imprisonment and now he is in judicial
custody in default of fine, therefore, it is prayed that the default
sentence awarded to the petitioner for the aforesaid offences may
be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 2021 and
the petitioner has so far undergone the total period of sentence,
i.e., two years and now he is judicial custody in default of payment
of fine, he has 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 default sentence awarded by the trial
court for offence under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC and affirmed
by the appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone
by the petitioner.
12. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. While
maintaining the petitioner's conviction for offences under Sections
[2025:RJ-JD:24646] (4 of 4) [CRLR-1272/2024]
457 and 380 of IPC, the sentence awarded to him in default of fine
is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The amount of
fine imposed by the trial Court is hereby waived.
13. The accused-petitioner is in custody and shall be released
forthwith, if not required in any other case.
14. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
151-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
