Gajsingh v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal was partly allowed. Conviction was maintained but sentence was reduced to the period already undergone. Sentence was suspended, appellants granted bail, and bond canceled.
What did the court decide?
Sentence reduced to period already undergone; sentence suspended; bail granted; bond canceled; impugned judgment modified.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
J U D G M E N T
S.B.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.278/1986 (Gajsingh Vs. State)
DATE OF JUDGMENT ::::: 05-05-2015 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Mr.Tripurari Sharma, for the appellant/s. Mr.RS Shekhawat, Public Prosecutor for State.
This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 16.6.1986 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Dholpur in sessions case no. 71/1985 whereby he has convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:
| Name of accused | Convicted u/s. | Sentenced |
|---|---|---|
| Gajsingh | 148 IPC | 2 years RI |
| 326 IPC | 4 years RI | |
| Bhagwan Singh) | 326/149 IPC | 4 years RI |
| Sultan ) |
149 IPC | 2 years RI |
| Jaswant ) |
323 IPC | 1 year RI |
Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 19.12.1982 an incident alleged to have taken place wherein it has been averred that in the noon in village Aam Ka Pura near the field of Babulal, the accused persons belaboured with Babulal. Siyaram and Vijay Singh rescued the injured. On the basis of this report, an FIR was registered for the offences under Sec.147,148,307, 326, 325/149 IPC. After usual investigation, police filed charge-sheet against the appellants before the concerned court/Magistrate, from where the case was committed to the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Dholpur for trial. The trial court has framed the charges for the aforesaid offences. The appellants denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as 06 witnesses and got exhibited certain documents.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be allowed to reduce the sentence and suspend it given the age of the appellants and time elapsed since the offense.
Whether the appellants, not being habitual offenders, have a valid claim for sentence remission based on time already undergone.
Whether the conviction should be maintained while modifying the sentence to imprisonment until the rising of the court.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Gajsingh
- appellant
Sultan
- appellant
Jaswant
- respondent
State of Rajasthan
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Rajasthan HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLA/278/1986
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court