Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1525 (RAJ)

Sher Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2023-08-11

FARJAND ALI

body2023
JUDGMENT : Farjand Ali, J. The appellant has preferred the instant appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C being aggrieved of the judgment dated 01.03.1995 passed by the learned Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act and Sessions Judge, Balotara in Criminal Case No.6/1993, whereby he has been convicted for the offences under Sections 3/7 and 3/9 of the Essential Commodities Act and for each count, he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of 3 months with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo simple imprisonment of 1 month. 2. Briefly stated, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the case are that the appellant was a Fair Price Shop Dealer in Ward No.24 of the Barmer. He received sugar for distribution in the November-December 1992 and January 1993. On inspection and enquiry, it was found that there were entries of distribution of sugar in the distribution register for many persons, whereas in the ration cards of the said persons, no corresponding entries were made. For some persons, there were double entries of distribution of sugar. The Enforcement Officer after conducting enquiry found certain irregularities and errors and submitted a report in this regard at the Police Station Barmer, which was registered as FIR No.222/1993 for the offences under section 3/7 and 3/9 of the Essential Commodities Act. After usual investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant. 3. The learned trial court framed charges against the appellant for the aforesaid offences and upon denial of guilt by him, commenced the trial. During the course of trial, as many as 9 witnesses were examined and various documents were exhibited. Thereafter, an explanation was sought from the accused-appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which he denied the prosecution allegations and claimed to be innocent. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated above vide judgment dated 01.03.1995, which is under assail before this court in the instant appeal. 4. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated above vide judgment dated 01.03.1995, which is under assail before this court in the instant appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the evidence brought on record is not sufficient to connect the appellant with the alleged crime; the appellant alone was not responsible for distribution of sugar; even if it is assumed that the relevant entries in the Ration Cards Ex.P/3 to Ex.P/9 were missing, it is not sufficient to constitute a criminal act. On these grounds, he prays for acceptance of the appeal and acquittal of the appellant. 5. Per contra learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently argued that the learned trial court has passed the impugned judgment after apropos appreciation of the evidence available on record and as the prosecution has fully established the guilt of the appellant by producing cogent and clinching evidence, no interference in the impugned judgment is called for in this appeal. 6. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the impugned judgment. 7. The learned trial court has reached to a finding that from the statements Pokar Singh (P.W.3), Tikma Ram (P.W.4), Dinesh Chandra (P.W.6) and Saubhagya Lal (P.W.7) and their ration cards, Ex.P/22, Ex.P/3, Ex.P/18, 11, as well as the Distribution Register (Ex.P/10), it is proved that the appellant has made wrong entries in the distribution register without distributing the sugar to these persons. The Enforcement Officer has stated in his testimony that on enquiry it was found that for the ration card holders, namely Tikma Ram, Likhma Ram, Jethu Singh, Shiv Karan, Nimba Ram, Gomti Devi and Champa Devi, whose ration cards were exhibited as Ex.P/3 to Ex.P/9), there are no entries of sugar distribution in their ration cards, whereas such entries have been made in distribution register. The Enforcement Officer has also pointed out certain double entries in the distribution register. Ghanshyam Pareek (P.W.10), who was posted as District Supply Officer, Barmer at the relevant time, proved the authorization letter (Ex.P/25) for the Fair Price Shop of the appellant. He also corroborated the prosecution case in the capacity of himself being holder of ration card (Ex.P/21) relating to the same shop. Ghanshyam Pareek (P.W.10), who was posted as District Supply Officer, Barmer at the relevant time, proved the authorization letter (Ex.P/25) for the Fair Price Shop of the appellant. He also corroborated the prosecution case in the capacity of himself being holder of ration card (Ex.P/21) relating to the same shop. Based on the aforesaid strong documentary evidence, which is further corroborated by the testimonies of the witnesses, the learned trial court came to a conclusion that the offences alleged are proved against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly, he was convicted for the said offences. 8. Upon thoughtful consideration, this court is of the opinion that though there are minor discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses, but a careful scrutiny of the same does not give rise to any suspicion over their truthfulness specially when the same is further corroborated by solid documentary evidence available on record. In the considered opinion of this court, the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt by producing cogent and unimpeachable evidence. The learned trial court has prudently discussed the entire evidence in detail and based upon thorough appreciation of the same has reached to the conclusion of guilt of the appellant. I find no error, irregularity or illegality in the impugned judgment of conviction. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is maintained. 9. As far as the question of quantum of sentence is concerned, it is worthwhile to note that the matter is of the year 1993 and relates to irregularities in distribution of sugar in a Fair Price Shop. The petitioner was 31 years of age at the relevant point of time and at present he is around 61 years old. It took 2 years for the trial to conclude and thereafter, this appeal is pending before this court for last 28 years. The right to speedy and expeditious trial is one of the most valuable and cherished rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The appellant has already suffered the agony of protracted trial, spanning over a period of more than 30 years and has been in the corridors of the court for this prolonged period. He has remained incarcerated for 9 days during trial. The appellant has already suffered the agony of protracted trial, spanning over a period of more than 30 years and has been in the corridors of the court for this prolonged period. He has remained incarcerated for 9 days during trial. The reformative theory of punishment is in vogue in our country and since the appellant is living peacefully since last 30 years as no report contrary to that has been received by this court, thus, it can be assumed that he has been reformed and no fruitful purpose would be served by sending him to jail at this stage as much misery has already been inflicted upon him. 10. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the case of the appellant deserves to be dealt with leniency. The appellant also deserves the benefit of the consistent view taken by this court in this regard. Thus, guided by the judicial pronouncements made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Haripada Das v. State of West Bangal reported in (1998) 9 SCC 678 and Alister Anthony Pareira v. State of Maharashtra reported in (2012) 2 SCC 648 and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, his criminal antecedents, his status in the society and the fact that he faced financial hardship and had to go through mental agony, this court is of the view that ends of justice would be met, if sentences imposed upon him for the offences under Sections 3/7 and 3/9 of the Essential Commodities Act are reduced to the period already undergone by him. 11. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction dated 01.03.1995 passed by the learned Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act and Sessions Judge, Balotara in Criminal Case No.6/1993 is affirmed but the quantum of sentence awarded by the learned trial court for the offences under Sections 3/7 and 3/9 of the Essential Commodities Act is modified to the extent that the sentence he has undergone till date would be sufficient and justifiable to serve the interest of justice. The appellant is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds are discharged. 12. The appeal is allowed in part. 13. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of. 14. The record be returned to the trial court.