Partly allowed

Mohan Lal v. State

Rajasthan HC4 Oct 2023CRLR/583/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order partly allowed a criminal revision petition challenging a conviction and reduced sentence for cruelty under Section 498A IPC. The High Court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone and waived the fine. It waived the fine and set the petitioner on bail. The case concerns a husband convicted of cruelty towards his wife, who had already spent significant time in jail during th

What did the court decide?

The sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. The fine of Rs.500/- is waived. The petitioner is on bail with bonds discharged.

Mohan Lal Vs State — Domestic Violence | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:32620]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 583/2002

¶4

Mohan Lal S/o Shanker Lal Ji Meena, R/o Singhatwada, District Udaipur.

¶5

(At present lodged in Central Jail, Udaipur)

----Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Shambhoo Singh
	Ms. Heli Pathak on behalf of
	Mr. Nishant Bora
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶12

Order

¶13

04/10/2023

¶14

Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 23.07.2002 passed in Cr. Appeal No.5/2002 by learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge (Fast Tract), Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellate court’) by which the appellate court partly allowed the appeal of the petitioner and while confirming the conviction for offence under Section 498A IPC, reduced the sentence as awarded by learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’) in Regular Cr. Case No.550/2000 vide judgment dated 04.05.2002 and imposed a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, further undergo one month S.I. The details of the sentence of the petitioner as reduced by the appellate court are as under :

[2023:RJ-JD:32620]

[CRLR-583/2002]

(2 of 4)

Offence U/s 498-A IPC : Six months’ S.I. and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month’s S.I.

¶19

Brief facts of the case are that on 14.08.2000, complainant Tejki filed a complaint against his husband, present petitioner, before Police Station Goverdhan Vilas, Udaipur inter-alia alleging therein that she married with the petitioner nearly 7 years ago and out of their wedlock, two sons Narendra and Laxman were born. At the time of marriage, certain dowry articles were given but his husband and in-laws were not happy and started misbehaving with the complainant and also demanded Rs.25,000/-. When the demand was not fulfilled, the complainant was physically tortured by her in-laws and ultimately on 02.05.2000, she was ousted from her matrimonial home.

¶20

On this report, Police registered the FIR No.327/2000 and started investigation. On completion of investigation, challan was filed against the petitioner for offence under Section 498A IPC.

¶21

Thereafter, charges were framed by the learned trial court against the petitioner, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

¶22

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statement of the accused-petitioner under section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded. In defence, two witnesses were examined by the petitioner.

¶23

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 04.05.2002 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner for aforesaid offence.

¶24

Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court,

[2023:RJ-JD:32620]

[CRLR-583/2002]

(3 of 4)

which came to be partly allowed vide judgment dated 23.07.2002 and while confirming the conviction, the learned appellate court reduced the sentence of the petitioner as mentioned above. Hence this revision petition against the conviction and sentence of the accused-petitioner.

¶29

At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner does not challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the occurrence relates back to year 2000 and the petitioner has so far suffered sentence for about 15 days out of total sentence. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner for the offence under Section 498A IPC may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶30

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accusedpetitioner. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused petitioner nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case.

¶31

I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the courts below regarding conviction of the accused-petitioner.

¶32

It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the year 2000 and the accused-petitioner has so far undergone a period of about 15 days incarceration out of total sentence, and so also suffered the agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the accused-petitioner has remained behind the bars for considerable

[2023:RJ-JD:32620]

[CRLR-583/2002]

(4 of 4)

time, it will be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Sections 498A IPC and reduced by the appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶37

Accordingly, the criminal revision is partly allowed. While maintaining the petitioner’s conviction and sentence for offence under Section 498A IPC, the sentence awarded to him for aforesaid offence is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The amount of fine of Rs.500/- imposed by the appellate court is also waived. The petitioner is on bail. His bail bonds stand discharged.

¶38

The record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.

¶39

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶40

12-MS/-

Mohan Lal v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Lal 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

Vidya Kanwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Rodi Lal Vs State

Suresh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bajrang Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Hanuman Singh and Anr. Vs State

Jamana Lal Vs State of Rajasthan