Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 2049 (RAJ)

Kanji v. State of Rajasthan

2021-10-28

MANOJ KUMAR GARG

body2021
JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellant No.1-Kanji and appellant No.2-Dhanji expired during the pendency of the appeal. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted a report dt. 28.10.2021 received from the SHO, Police Station Abapura, Distt. Banswara mentioning therein that Kanji and Dhanji, both sons of Nanura expired about 10-15 years back so the present appeal qua the appellants No.1 & 2 stands abated. Accordingly, the criminal appeal qua the said two accused is dismissed as abated. 3. So far as accused-appellant No.3-Kaliya is concerned, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellant No.3 was merely convicted for the offence under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.50/-; in default of payment of fine, he was directed to further undergo 7 days simple imprisonment. At this stage, learned counsel does not want to challenge the conviction of the said appellant for offence under Section 323 IPC. However, he has confined his arguments only to the point of quantum of sentence and submits that the occurrence relates to 1991 and the appellant No.3-Kaliya has faced the protracted trial and suffered mental agony during pendency of the appeal since 1994. Further, he remained in custody from 02.03.1991 to 01.04.1991 i.e. about one month. In these circumstances, it is prayed that in the interest of justice, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellant No.3-Kaliya may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 4. Learned public prosecutor submits that the sentence awarded by the court below cannot be said to be disproportionate, on the contrary, the same is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced before me and carefully gone through the judgment as also the material available on record. 6. In my considered view, since the appellant No.3 suffered mental agony since 1991 and he remained in custody for one month, the ends of justice would be met if the substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded by the trial court is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the appellant No.3-Kaliya. 7. Consequently, the criminal appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant No.3-Kaliya for the offences under Section 323 IPC is maintained. 7. Consequently, the criminal appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant No.3-Kaliya for the offences under Section 323 IPC is maintained. However, the substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded by the court below to the appellant is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. So far as fine amount is concerned, the amount of fine i.e. Rs.50/-imposed by the trial court is enhanced to Rs.500/-. Three months time is granted to the appellant No.3-Kaliya to deposit the fine amount before the trial court. The said appellant is on bail. His bail bonds stand discharged. 8. Record of the trial court be sent back immediately.