Harliya, Harlal @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Unsuccessful in his attempt to assail judgment dated 15th of September, 2015, rendered by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1 Chittorgarh (for

short, 'learned trial Court'), before learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan (for short, 'learned appellate Court'), petitioner has

preferred this revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. At the threshold, learned trial Court convicted accused-petitioner for offence under

Sections 457 and 380/511 IPC and handed down following sentences:

Section 457 IPC: Three years’ simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo two month’s simple

imprisonment.

Section 380/511IPC: Three years’ simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo two months’ simple

imprisonment.

The learned appellate Court, vide judgment dated 14.01.2016, while maintaining sentence for offence under Section 457 IPC, reduced the sentence for

offence under Section 380/511 from three years’ simple imprisonment to one year’s simple imprisonment and also reduced fine from

Rs.2,000/- to Rs.1,000/-.

In brief, facts of the case are that complainant, Hiralal submitted a written report before Police Station Chanderiya alleging, inter aila, therein that the

accused-petitioner along with two-three persons entered into Govt. Upper Primary School, Jeetawal with the intention to commit theft but due to

awakening of villagers they fled away from the spot and on chasing the petitioner was caught. On the basis of above report, Police registered a case

for offence under Sections 457, 380 and 511 IPC and started investigation. After investigation, police submitted charge-sheet against accused persons

for offence under Sections 457 and 380/511. Learned trial Court framed charge against the accused persons for the said offence and on denial they

were put on trial. Â

Before learned trial Court, prosecution examined ten witnesses and exhibited five documents. Subsequently, statements of accused-persons including

the petitioner were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. On conclusion of trial, the learned trial Court found the accused persons guilty of offence

under Section 457 and 380/511 IPC and sentenced as aforesaid.

On appeal, learned appellate Court while maintaining the conviction reduced the sentence as aforementioned. It is in that background, petitioner has

approached this Court.

At the outset, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has not challenged the concurrent findings recorded by learned Courts below to the extent

petitioner is held guilty for offence under Sections 457 and 380/511 IPC. However, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the

petitioner has already suffered sentence of two years and four months, out of the total sentence of three years, therefore, taking into account the

peculiar facts of the case, substantive sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner be reduced to the period he has already undergone.  Â

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer of petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor has argued that both the Courts

below have recorded findings against the accused-petitioner, and therefore, it is not desirable to reduce the sentence awarded to him.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment of learned appellate Court as well as judgment of learned trial Court and

thoroughly scanned the record of case.

There remains no dispute that the petitioner has already remained in custody for two years & four months out of total maximum sentence of three

years awarded to him, and therefore, taking into account the entire fact scenario and the concession made by learned counsel for the petitioner, I feel

persuaded to accede to the prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner to the limited extent of reducing the sentence to the period already suffered by

him.

Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed in part and upholding the conviction of the accused-petitioner, sentence awarded to him is reduced to the

period already undergone while maintaining fine. The petitioner, who is under incarceration, may be released forthwith, if not required in any other

case subject to his depositing the amount of fine.