Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 2226 (RAJ)

Abdul Rasid @ Rasid Ahmed v. State of Rajasthan

2023-12-12

MANOJ KUMAR GARG

body2023
JUDGMENT : Manoj Kumar Garg, J. 1. Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 02.07.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat, District Pali (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') in Criminal Appeal No. 30/2012 by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 04.09.2012 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sojat, District Pali (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Regular Case No. 736/2007, whereby, the learned trial court convicted the petitioner for offence under Section 498A IPC and sentenced him to undergo six months' S.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further undergo one month's S.I. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 10.09.2007, complainant Shahnaj Bano submitted a complaint before the concerned court to the effect that she was subjected to cruelty by her husband and in-laws for dowry. The concerned court sent the complaint to the concerned Police Station under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Upon which, the police registered the case against the accused persons including the present petitioner and started investigation. 3. On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused persons including the petitioner for offences under Sections 498A, 406, 323 IPC. Thereafter, the charges of the case were framed against the accused persons including the petitioner, who denied the charges and claimed trial. 4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined six witnesses. Thereafter, statements of the accused persons including the petitioner under Section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded. 5. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 04.09.2012 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner for offences as mentioned earlier. 6. Aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 02.07.2013. Hence this revision petition. 7. At the threshold, counsel for the petitioner does not challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the occurrence relates back to year 2007 and he has so far suffered a sentence of about four days, out of total sentence of six months' S.I. Further, compromise has already been arrived at between the parties. 7. At the threshold, counsel for the petitioner does not challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the occurrence relates back to year 2007 and he has so far suffered a sentence of about four days, out of total sentence of six months' S.I. Further, compromise has already been arrived at between the parties. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the substantive sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner for the offence under Section 498A IPC may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 8. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner. The learned PP 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. 9. 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. 10. It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the year 2007 and the accused-petitioner has so far undergone a period of four days incarceration, out of total sentence of six months' S.I. and compromise has also been arrived at between the parties, and so also the appellant suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the accused-petitioner 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 498A IPC and affirmed by the appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone by him while maintaining the amount of fine. 11. Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the petitioner's conviction and sentence for offence under Section 498A IPC, the sentence awarded to him for aforesaid offence is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The amount of fine is hereby maintained. Three months' time is granted to deposit the fine before the trial court. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner shall undergo one month's simple imprisonment. The petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged. 12. The record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.