Petitioner, aged 70, challenged the sentence of one year imprisonment for Section 409 IPC, having already undergone the sentence. Court maintained conviction but reduced sentence to period already served.
Sentence reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 392 / 2000
Om Prakash Sharma S/o Makhan Lal, R/o Baswa, District Dausa.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajeet Bhandari Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Gurjar, P.P.
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Judgment
15/02/2018
Petitioner had faced trial in FIR No. 806/80 registered at Police Station Kotwali Alwar District Alwar for the offence punishable under Sections 409 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as ‘IPC’).
Trial court vide judgment/order dated 08.06.1999, ordered the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 409 I.P.C. Appeal filed by the petitioner was disposed of by the Appellate Court vide order dated 19.05.2000. Sentence of the petitioner was reduced from two years to one year. Hence, the present petition.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner as ordered by the Courts below, but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner be reduced to the period already undergone by him. Occurrence in the present case relates
(2 of 2)
[CRLR-392/2000]
to the year 1979. Petitioner is facing the criminal proceedings since the year 1979. Recovery has already been effected. Petitioner is aged about 70 years. Petitioner is not a previous convict.
Learned state counsel has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner to the period already undergone by him.
Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner under Section 409 I.P.C. is maintained. However, sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner, is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(SABINA)J.
S.Kumawat/D-17
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the sentence of imprisonment should be reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner.
Whether the conviction under Section 409 IPC should be maintained while reducing the sentence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Om Prakash Sharma
State of Rajasthan
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
