Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 162 (RAJ)

Sendha and Mishra v. State of Rajasthan

2001-02-01

SUNIL KUMAR GARG

body2001
JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioners against the judgment and order of sentence dated 10.8.2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhinmal in Criminal Appeal No. 10/2000 by which he dismissed the appeal of the present accused petitioners Sendha and Mishra and upheld the judgment an order of sentence dated 18.3.2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sanchore in Criminal Case No. 815/97 so far as they relate to them. The accused petitioners were convicted and sentenced in the following manner: Name of accused petitioner convicted under section sentence awarded 1. Sendha) 2. Mishra) 325 IPC One year SI and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month SI. 447 IPC One month SI. 323 IPC Three months SI. The above sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. In this revision petition, the learned counsel for the accused petitioners has not challenged the findings of conviction recorded by both the courts below and has prayed that so far as the revision regarding conviction of the accused petitioners for the offence under sections 325, 447 and 323 IPC is concerned, it may be dismissed. However, he has argued on the point of sentence stating that looking to entire facts and circumstances of the case and that both accused petitioners are in jail : since 18.8.2000, a lenient view be taken and sentence of both the accused petitioners be reduced to the period already undergone by them and they may be released accordingly. 3. The prayer of the learned counsel for the accused petitioners has not been opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. However, he has submitted that some compensation should be awarded to the injured PW. 2 Kishna. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the accused petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record of the case. 5. Since the findings of conviction recorded by both the courts below against the present accused petitioners have not been challenged in this revision petition, therefore, this revision petition against their conviction is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the accused petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record of the case. 5. Since the findings of conviction recorded by both the courts below against the present accused petitioners have not been challenged in this revision petition, therefore, this revision petition against their conviction is liable to be dismissed. 6. However, on point of sentence, taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and that the accused petitioners are in jail since 10.8.2000, it will be just and proper that the period of sentence awarded to the accused petitioners be reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, some compensation must also be allowed to be paid by the accused petitioners to the injured PW. 2 Kishna. From all point of view, it will be just and proper to direct both the accused petitioners to pay Rs. 2000/- to the injured Kishna. Accordingly, this revision petition against conviction is dismissed and the conviction of the present accused petitioners Sendha and Mishra for the offence under sections 325, 447 and 323 IPC by the learned Judicial Magistrates First Class, Sanchore through his judgment and order dated 18.3.2000 as confirmed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhinmal in appeal vide his judgment and order dated 10.8.2000 is maintained. However, on point of sentence, this revision petition is partly allowed and the sentence awarded by the courts below to the present accused petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone by them. Hence, both the accused petitioners Sendha and Mishra, who are in jail, be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. It is further directed that each of the accused petitioner shall pay Rs. 2,000/- (Rs. two thousand only) as compensation to the injured P.W. 2 Kishan. For depositing the said amount in the Court, two months' time is granted to the accused petitioners and after it is being deposited in the Court the said amount shall be given to the injured PW. 2 Kishna. Revision partly allowed. *******