Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 199 (RAJ)

Mange Khan Qazi v. State of Rajasthan

2019-01-16

MANOJ KUMAR GARG

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 14.11.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadra, District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No. 09/2012 by which the learned Judge convicted the appellant for offence under Sections 307, 326 & 324 IPC and sentenced as under : U/s 307 IPC 3 years R.I. along with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, failing which, further undergo S.I. for one month. U/s 326 IPC 5 years R.I. along with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, failing which, further undergo S.I. for one month. U/s 324 IPC 2 years R.I. along with fine of Rs. 500/-, failing which, further undergo S.I. for fifteen days. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 24.09.2011, a written report was submitted by the complainant Sabir Khan before the Police Station Bhadra, stating therein that on 23.09.2011 his cousin Mange Khan, who is habitual of having drugs and by nature a criminal person, used to quarrel with him. Yesterday night at 11:00 PM Mange Khan, who was under influence of drugs came to his house having Lamchad Gun and suddenly started abusing to the complainant. During that process his daughter-in-law Madeena, son Mushtaq and relative Rafeeq came to the spot, whereupon Mange Khan with intention to kill him made a fire shot, resultantly palates of fire got by Madeena, Mustaq and Rafeeq. Soon after the incident, they were taken to Govt. Hospital, Bhadra. 3. Upon these facts, the police registered a crime report No. 562/2011 for offences under Sections 452, 323 IPC R/w Section 27 of Arms Act and started investigation. After completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the present appellant for offence under Sections 307, 326 and 324 IPC. Thereafter, the charges of the case were framed. 4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and various documents were also exhibited. Thereafter, statement of appellant under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. 5. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 14.11.2014 convicted the present appellant for offence under Sections 307, 326 & 324 IPC and sentenced as mentioned above. 6. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and various documents were also exhibited. Thereafter, statement of appellant under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. 5. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 14.11.2014 convicted the present appellant for offence under Sections 307, 326 & 324 IPC and sentenced as mentioned above. 6. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that accused appellant is not challenging the finding of conviction but since the accused appellant has remained in custody since 14.11.2014 and he has already suffered a sentence of 04 years, 02 months and 7 days, therefore, it is prayed that the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 7. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellant nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case. 8. I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the trial court regarding conviction of the accused-appellant. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the custody certificate of the appellant according to which the appellant has so far undergone a period of 04 years 02 months and 07 days. Thus, undisputedly, the appellant has so far undergone a period of more than four years out of the total five years rigorous imprisonment so also suffered the agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the appellant has remained behind the bars for considerable time, it will be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Section 326 IPC is reduced to the period already undergone by him. So far as the sentence of three years R.I. awarded for offence under Section 307 IPC and sentence of two years R.I. awarded for offence under Sections 324 IPC by the trial court, the same has already been served by the appellant. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the appellants conviction and sentence for offence under Section 326 IPC, the sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the appellants conviction and sentence for offence under Section 326 IPC, the sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone. The fine imposed by the trial court is hereby waived. The appellant may be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. 10. The record of the trial court be sent back forthwith.