State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor vs Mr. Rahul Sharma, Adv. &

: Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Adv. with Mr. Rahul Sharma, Adv. & Ms. Chanchal, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Addl.G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 30/07/2025

1. The instant criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment dated 03.01.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindaun City (hereinafter referred to as learned 'Appellate Court') in Criminal Appeal No.17/2003 whereby learned Appellate Court partly allowed the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner to the extent of his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of IPC and set aside his conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 113, 149(1) and 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1988') vide the judgment [2025:RJ-JP:29031] (2 of 5) [CRLR-42/2007] dated 10.05.2003 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hindaun City (hereinafter referred to as learned 'trial Court') in Criminal Case No.136/1997. Learned trial Court vide this impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offences punishable as under:- i. Under Section 279 of IPC-Six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 15 days' simple imprisonment, ii. Under Section 304-A of IPC-Two years' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month's simple imprisonment, iii. Under Section 337 of IPC-Three months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.300/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 15 days' simple imprisonment, iv. Under Section 338 of IPC-One year's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 15 days' simple imprisonment & v. Under Sections 113, 149(1) and 134 of the Act of 1988-Total fine of Rs.500/-.

2. As per the brief facts of the case, the petitioner was tried by learned trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of IPC and Sections 113, 149(1) and 134 of the Act of 1988. During trial, as many as 21 witnesses were examined and 36 documents were exhibited before learned trial Court.

3. The petitioner was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., however, he did not produce any witness in his defence. Vide the impugned judgment dated 10.05.2003, learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offences punishable [2025:RJ-JP:29031] (3 of 5) [CRLR-42/2007] as aforesaid. However, his conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 113, 149(1) and 134 of the Act of 1988 was set aside.

4. Feeling aggrieved of the impugned judgment dated

10.05.2003 passed by learned trial Court, the petitioner preferred an appeal No.17/2003 before learned Appellate Court. Vide the impugned judgment dated 03.01.2007, learned Appellate Court, partly allowed the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner to the extent of his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of IPC and set aside his conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 113, 149(1) and 134 of the Act of 1988. Hence, the present criminal revision petition was filed.

5. At the threshold, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner does not want to challenge the finding of conviction for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner and further submitted that the case in hand relates to an incident occurred in the year 1996; the petitioner was convicted and sentenced vide the impugned judgment dated 10.05.2003 passed by learned trial Court; the appeal filed by the petitioner was partly allowed by learned Appellate Court on 03.01.2007; the present petitioner has remained in custody for about four months; and the present petitioner suffered the agony of trial, appeal and the present petition, for more than 31 years, therefore, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner submitted that considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering the length of period of trial, appeal and revision petition, a liberal view [2025:RJ-JP:29031] (4 of 5) [CRLR-42/2007] be taken for the petitioner and the sentence awarded to the petitioner as aforesaid may be reduced and may be modified to the extent of sentence of imprisonment already undergone by him.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent-State opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

8. It is an undisputed fact that the occurrence of this case relates to the year 1996; the petitioner has served the sentence for more than four months; the petitioner has suffered the agony and trauma of trial, appeal and this petition for 31 years and the present petition is pending since 2007.

9. In view of the aforesaid discussion and the fact that the petitioner has served the sentence for more than four months, the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner is accepted and the present petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the petitioner for the aforesaid offences, the sentence awarded against him is ordered to be reduced and modified to the extent of sentence already undergone by him. However, the amount of fine is hereby maintained.

10. It is ordered that the amount of fine i.e. Rs.2,300/- shall be deposited by petitioner before learned trial Court within a period of three months from passing of this order. It is also directed that in default of payment of fine by the petitioner, he shall undergo simple imprisonment of three months. [2025:RJ-JP:29031] (5 of 5) [CRLR-42/2007]

11. Any pending applications also stand disposed of.

12. Record of the Court below be sent back immediately. AARZOO ARORA /11 (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J