Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Najarya @ Najar Hussain vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:24804) on 21 May, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:24804]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 680/2006
Najarya @ Najar Hussain S/o Atta Mohammed, Resident of 12,
Kishana Wali, Police Station Shri Vijay Nagar, Teh. Vijay Nagar,
Dist. Sriganganagar.
(Lodged at District Jail, Sriganganagar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Matoria
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG
Mr. P.K. Bhati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
21/05/2025
1. Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against
the judgment dated 18.04.2006 passed in Cr. Appeal No.01/2005 by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, Dist.
Sriganganagar, by which the appellate court dismissed the
petitioner's appeal and upheld the judgment dated 05.01.2005
passed in Regular Cr. Case No.10/2002 by learned Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Srivijaynagar, Dist. Sriganganagar by which
the learned trial court convicted him under Section 3/25 of Arms Act
and sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment and a
fine of Rs.500/-. In default of the payment of fine to further undergo
two months' rigorous imprisonment.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 22.08.2001, upon receiving
information from the Jaitsar outpost, ASI Kishanlal of Police Station
[2025:RJ-JD:24804] (2 of 3) [CRLR-680/2006]
Srivijaynagar apprehended the accused-petitioner Nazar Hussain
near Kishnawali. During the search, a country-made 12 bore pistol
and two live cartridges were recovered from his bag, for which he
possessed no valid licence. The weapon was seized on the spot and
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 3/25 of Arms Act, who pleaded
not guilty and claimed trial.
4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 06 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 05.01.2005 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 18.04.2006.
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 2001 and out of total sentence
of one year's R.I., the accused petitioner has already served about
three and a half 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:24804] (3 of 3) [CRLR-680/2006]
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 2001 and
the petitioner has so far undergone a period of about three and a
half months 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
3/25 of Arms Act 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 3/25
of Arms Act, the sentence awarded to him for the aforesaid offence 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
23-GKaviya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
