Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 369 (RAJ)

Baldev Singh v. Pritam Singh

2006-02-03

H.R.PANWAR

body2006
JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal revision petition under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code' hereinafter) is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.3.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar (for short 'the appellate Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 2004 whereby the appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by petitioner and affirmed the order dated 25.6.2004 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar (for short 'the Trial Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Case No. 285 of 2001 whereby the Trial Court has convicted the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) and sentenced him to undergo one and a half years simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2,40,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo three months simple imprisonment. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the complainant. Perused the judgments and order of the appellate Court as well as of the Trial Court and record of the case. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Act. However, he has confined his arguments only to the point of quantum of sentence and submits that out of the sentence of one and a half years, the petitioner has already undergone sentence of imprisonment for more than ten months. He prays that the sentence awarded to the petitioner may be reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner has already undergone sentence of imprisonment for more than ten months, I am of the view the ends of justice would be met if the substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner. 5. Consequently, the revision petition filed by petitioner Baldev Singh is partly allowed. The conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 awarded by the Trial Court and affirmed by the appellate Court is maintained. However, the substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. 5. Consequently, the revision petition filed by petitioner Baldev Singh is partly allowed. The conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 awarded by the Trial Court and affirmed by the appellate Court is maintained. However, the substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. However, sentence of fine is maintained and in default of payment of fine, the petitioner shall undergo one month's imprisonment. The petitioner is in jail, he be set at liberty on deposit of the fine amount, if not required in any other case. 6. Application for suspension of sentence stands disposed of.Revision petition patly allowed. *******