Partly allowed

Munshi and Others v. State

Rajasthan HC9 May 2013CRLA/230/1990

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was a criminal appeal challenging convictions under Sections 148, 324, 147, and 323 IPC. The High Court maintained the conviction but partly allowed the appeal by reducing the sentence to the period already served in confinement. It also dismissed the remaining appellants' appeal as withdrawn and discharged their bail bonds.

What did the court decide?

The sentence of the appellants Munshi, Darshna @ Darshan Singh, and Parima was reduced to the period already undergone in confinement; bail bonds discharged.

Munshi and Others Vs State — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶3

JUDGMENT

¶4

SB Criminal Appeal No. 230/1990 (Munshi & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan) :: Date of Judgment 9^th May, 2013

¶5

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶6

Mr. Jitendra Pandey, for the accused appellants Mr. Pradeep Shrimal) P.P. for the State Mr. Piyush Kumar )

¶7

This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 23.5.1990 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Dholpur in Sessions Case No. 57/89, whereby the learned trial court convicted the accused appellants Munshi, Darshna @ Darshan Singh and Parima for the offence under Section 148 and sentenced to undergo 1 year's RI with fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's RI; and they were also convicted for the offence under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo 2 years' RI with fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month's RI. Appellants Siyaram and Rambharosi have been convicted for the offence under Section 147 and 323 IPC, but the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act has been granted to them for

¶8

¶9

maintaining the peace for two years and they were directed to furnish the bail bonds of Rs. 5000/- and personal bond of the like amount and it was directed that in case the same offence is committed again, they shall undergo the sentence in this matter also in addition to that matter.

¶10

Brief facts of the case are that on 23.11.1987, Kaptan lodged a written report at Police Station, Bari regarding the incident alleged to had taken place on the same day at 12.00 noon. On the basis of the said report, the police registered a case for the offence under Sections 147, 307, 324 and 323 IPC. After completion of investigation, the police filed a challan for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326 and 307 IPC. On committal, the trial court framed charge against the accused appellants for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 307 and 307/149 IPC. The appellants denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses and exhibited 25 documents. Statement of the accused were recorded under Section 313 CrPC. After hearing the arguments, the learned trial court passed the aforesaid judgment.

¶11

¶12

Hence, this appeal has been preferred by the appellants.

¶13

At the very out-set, learned counsel for the appellants has contended that he is not challenging the conviction part of the judgment of the Court below. He has further requested that since appellats Siya Ram and Rambharosi have been given the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, hence at this stage he wants to withdraw the appeal filed on behalf of accused appellants no. 4 and 5 i.e. Siyaram and Rambharosi. He has further contended that looking to the nature of the case as well as fact that they have marriagable children; they are not the habitual offenders; they are the villagers and accused appellant Munshi has remain remained in judicial custody for about 30 days; accused appellant Darshna @ Darshan Singh has remained in judicial custody for about 17 days and Parima has remained in judicial custody for about 106 days; and the fact that incident is alleged to have taken place on 21^st March, 1988 i.e. about 25 years ago from today and they are facing the mental agony since the last 25 years, hence either the accused appellants should be released on probation and

¶14

¶15

if not, then they should be released for the period already undergone by them in confinement.

¶16

Learned PP appearing for the State

¶17

has opposed the same.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record.

¶19

Looking to the facts and

¶20

circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the arguments of learned counsel for the appellants, ends of justice would be met if the sentence awarded to the appellants Munshi, Darshna @ Darshan Singh and Parima is reduced to the period already undergone by them in confinement. Hence, this appeal is disposed of with the following directions: i) The conviction of the appellants is maintained.

¶21

ii) The appeal of the appellants Munshi, Darshna @ Darshan Singh and Parima is partly allowed.

¶22

iii)The appeal of the appellants Siyaram and Ram Bharosi is hereby dismissed as withdrawn. iii) The sentence of accused appellants Munshi, Darshna @ Darshan Singh and Parima is reduced to the period already undergone by

¶23

¶24

them in judicial confinement, as mentioned above.

¶25

iv) The sentence of the accused appellants was suspended and they are on bail. They need not to surrender and their bail bonds stand discharged.

¶26

Impugned judgment stands modified, as indicated hereinabove.

¶27

(Mahesh Chandra Sharma), J.

¶28

¶29

All corrections made in the judgment / order have been incorporated in the judgment / order being E-mailed.

¶30

Dilip Khandelwal

¶31

Munshi and Others v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munshi and Others v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jivan Singh Vs State

Gyani @ Sharif Khan Vs State

Ram Singh Vs State

Dhansi and Ors. Vs P.P.

Anwer Hussain Vs P.P.

Shri Chand @ Sethiya Vs State