Chhitarlal vs State of Rajasthan

I.S. Israni, J.—This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated May 22, 1980 Oct. passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Baran in Criminal Appeal No. 34/90 (135/87) whereby, be affirmed the judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, No. 1 Baran dated December 3, 1987, passed in criminal case No. 54/83, whereby, the sentence u/s 326. IPC was reduced from two years rigorous imprisonment to four months'' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/-was maintained in default of which, he will further undergo 15 days further rigorous imprisonment like that.

It is submitted by Mr. Jaswant Singh, learned Counsel that all other accused-persons were convicted u/s 323, IPC and were give benefit of Probation of Offenders Act. A fine of Rs. 125/- was also imposed on each of the Probationers, which was to be paid to Tulsi Ram, Jagdish, Kishan Singh alias Chaturbbuj & Khuman Singh.

It is further submitted by the learned Counsel that in the FIR, it is mentioned that the petitioner was armed with lathi, whereas. P.W. 2 Kishan Singh & P.W. 5 Khuman Singh have stated in their statements that the petitioner was armed with Gandasi and caused injury on little finger of the hand of Chaturbbuj which resulted in fracture. It is submitted that dispute arose on account of some animals entering the field. It is also sub-milted that medical report shows that this is the only injury, which is said to be grievous, whereas, the injured Chaturbbuj has not received any other serious injury. It is also submitted that all the accused persons had also giving beatings to the injured Chaturbbuj with Iathies. However, all other accused persons as stated above have been given benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act.

I have heard both the parties and also gone through the judgments of both the courts, Merely, because in the FIR, it was mentioned that the petitioner was armed with lathi, will not cause any shadow of doubt on the statements of P.W. 2 Kishan Singh & P.W. 5 Khuman Singh, who are said to be eye-witnesses. The medical report also supports the statements of these witnesses, inasmuch as incised wound has been caused to the injured Chaturbhuj.

However, the learned Counsel further prays that since the incident took place in the year, 1982 and the petitioner bad already undergone tribulations of trial for 8 years, so, the sentence awarded to him may be converted to the already undergone. The petitioner is in jail for 1-1/2 months. Reliance has been placed on Damodar Prasad v. State of Rajasthan 1989 (14) RCC 105 in which the accused, who was convicted u/s 326, IPC and had remained in coustody for one month and seventeen days, was sentenced to the term already undergone by him with fine of Rs. 1000/-.

6 Since the criminal proceedings have been pending for nearly eight years and the petitioner has already undergone the mental torture such a long time, I am inclined to reduce the sentence of the petitioner to already under gone with a further rider that he shall pay amount of Rs. 100/- each, to Tulsiram, Jagdish, Kishan Singh. Chaturbhuj & Khuman Singh within a period of 30 days. If the amount of Rs. 400/- is not deposited within the period mentioned above in the trial Court, the petitioner shall undergo the remaining period of sentence awarded to him by the first appellate court.

The revision petition is partly allowed, as indicated above.