Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 2198 (RAJ)

Vikram Singh @ Dan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2023-12-06

MANOJ KUMAR GARG

body2023
JUDGMENT : Manoj Kumar Garg, J. 1. Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 24.11.2015 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 10/2015 (6/2015) by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Balotra (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') by which the appellate court partly allowed the petitioner's appeal and while affirming the conviction of the petitioner, reduced his sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Balotra vide judgment dated 19.02.2015 in Cr. Regular Case No. 477/2014. Details of the sentence as reduced by the appellate court for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC are as under: Offence under Section 457 IPC One year & six months' S.I. and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo fifteen days' S.I. Offence under Section 380 IPC Six months' S.I. and a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo fifteen days' S.I. 2. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 3. Brief facts of the case are that complainant Bhoma Ram submitted a report before the PS Sindhari, Barmer against unknown persons to the effect that on 19.02.2014 in the evening, after having dinner, he along with his family members went to sleep after locking the main door of the house. In the next morning, he found the door of the room open and household articles were scattered in the room and ornaments were missing. The complainant alleged that some unknown persons committed theft in his house. On this report, Police registered a case against unknown persons for offence under Sections 457, 380 IPC and started investigation. During investigation, the petitioner was arrested by the Police. 4. After completion investigation, the police filed challan against the present petitioner and other accused-persons. Thereafter, the trial court framed charges against the petitioner for offences under Sections 457, 380 IPC, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited some documents. Thereafter, statement of the accused-petitioner under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. No witness was examined in defence. 6. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 19.02.2015 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner for aforesaid offence. 7. Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court. Thereafter, statement of the accused-petitioner under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. No witness was examined in defence. 6. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 19.02.2015 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner for aforesaid offence. 7. Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court. The learned appellate court partly allowed the appeal vide its judgment dated 24.112015 and while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC, reduced his sentence. Hence, this revision petition. 8. At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence is related to the year 2014 and out of total sentence of one year & six months' S.I., the accused petitioner has already served eight months' of imprisonment, therefore, it is prayed that the sentence awarded to petitioner for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 9. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused petitioner nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case. 10. I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the courts below regarding conviction of the accused-petitioner. 11. Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 2014 and the petitioner has so far undergone a period of eight months in custody out of one year & six months of total sentence, so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has remained behind the bars for eight months, it will be just and proper, if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC and as reduced by the appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner while maintaining the fine amount as imposed by the appellate court. 12. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the petitioner's conviction for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC, the sentence awarded to him for the aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. 12. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the petitioner's conviction for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC, the sentence awarded to him for the aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The fine imposed by the appellate court is hereby maintained. Three months' time is granted to deposit the fine amount before the trial court. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner shall undergo fifteen days' simple imprisonment. The petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged. 13. The record of trial Court as well as the appellate court be sent back forthwith.