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

Manchha Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24806)
2025 Latest Caselaw 9964 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 9964 Raj
Judgement Date : 21 May, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Manchha Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24806) on 21 May, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:24806]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                         JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 604/2021

1.        Manchha Ram S/o Sh. Chhagan Lal, Aged About 43 Years,
          B/c Mali, R/o Goyali, Sirohi, Tehsil And District Sirohi
          (Raj.). (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Jodhpur).
2.        Chhagan Lal S/o Sh. Babu Lal, Aged About 73 Years, B/c
          Mali, R/o Goyali, Sirohi, Tehsil And District Sirohi (Raj.).
          (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Jodhpur).
                                                                      ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                     ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Pritam Solanki
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. KS Kumpawat, PP



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Judgment

21/05/2025

Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has

been filed by the petitioners challenging the judgment dated

10.10.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention

of Atrocities) Cases, Sirohi (hereinafter referred to as 'the

appellate court') in Criminal Appeal No.85/2017 (25/2017) by

which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioners

and upheld the judgment dated 17.01.2017 passed by the learned

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi, in Cr. Regular Case

No.1207/2015, whereby, the learned trial court convicted and

sentenced the petitioners as under :

S.No.      Offence      Sentence                Fine              Sentence        in
                                                                  default of fine
  1.     420 IPC      5 years RI          Rs.2 lacs               1 year SI
  2.     406 IPC      3 years RI          Rs.50,000/- 3 months SI



 [2025:RJ-JD:24806]                   (2 of 4)                    [CRLR-604/2021]



Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

Brief facts of the case are that on 06.08.2015, complainant

Dr. Ankur Gupta filed a complaint against the petitioners before

the concerned Court for offences under Sections 420, 406, 409,

120B IPC. The said complaint was sent under Section 156(3)

Cr.P.C. to the concerned Police Station. Upon which, FIR was

registered and Police commenced investigation. On completion of

the Investigation, Police filed challan against the petitioners for

offences under Sections 420, 406, 409, 120B IPC. Thereafter, the

trial court framed the charge against the accused-petitioners, who

denied the charges and claimed trial.

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many

as seven witnesses and exhibited certain documents. Thereafter,

statements of the accused-petitioners were recorded under section

313 Cr.P.C.

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide

impugned judgment dated 17.01.2017 convicted and sentenced

the accused-petitioners for offence under Sections 420 & 406 IPC.

Aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the petitioners

preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which

came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 10.10.2019. Hence

this revision petition.

Learned Public Prosecutor has informed this Court about the

demise of petitioner No.2--Chhagan Lal on 03.11.2023. A copy of

his death certificate has been supplied to this Court, which is

taken on record.

In these circumstances, the criminal revision qua petitioner

No.2 Chhagan Lal is hereby dismissed as abated.

[2025:RJ-JD:24806] (3 of 4) [CRLR-604/2021]

So far as the petitioner No.1--Manchha Ram is concerned, at

the threshold, counsel submits that he does not challenge the

finding of conviction but it is submitted that the occurrence relates

back to year 2015 and the petitioner No.1 has so far suffered a

sentence of more than three years and seven months, out of total

sentence of five years R.I. In such circumstances, it is prayed that

the substantive sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner No.1

for the offence under Sections 420 & 406 IPC may be reduced to

the period already undergone by him.

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed

the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-

petitioners. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any

occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused

petitioners 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 courts below regarding

conviction of the accused-petitioner.

It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the

year 2015 and the accused-petitioner No.1 has so far undergone a

period of more than three years and seven months incarceration,

out of total sentence of five years R.I., and so also suffered the

mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the

over-all circumstances and the fact that the accused-petitioner

No.1 has remained behind the bars for a considerable time, it will

be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court for

offence under Sections 420 & 406 IPC and affirmed by the

[2025:RJ-JD:24806] (4 of 4) [CRLR-604/2021]

appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone by

him.

Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed.

While maintaining the conviction of the petitioner No.1--Manchha

Ram for offence under Sections 420 & 406 IPC, the sentence

awarded to him for aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the

period already undergone. The amount of fine imposed for offence

under Section 420 IPC is reduced from Rs.2 lacs to Rs.10,000/-

and for offence under Section 406 IPC is reduced from

Rs.50,000/- to Rs.5,000/-. Default sentence awarded for both the

offences is also reduced to 15 days SI.

Two months' time is granted to deposit the reduced fine

amount before the trial court. The fine amount, if any, already

deposited by the petitioner shall be adjusted. If the petitioner

No.1 fails deposit the reduced fine amount, he shall undergo the

reduced default sentence of 15 days SI.

The petitioner No.1 is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail

bonds are cancelled.

The record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 47-MS/-

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