Partly allowed

Nathu Ram @ Nath Mal v. State

Rajasthan HC18 Apr 2024CRLA/191/1992

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against conviction and sentencing for assault under Section 326 IPC. Court maintained conviction but reduced sentence to the period already undergone, citing mental trauma and prolonged custody. Fine and bail conditions modified.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to the period already undergone; fine amount maintained payable within three months; bail bonds directed to be furnished under Section 437-A Cr.P.C.

Nathu Ram @ Nath Mal Vs State — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:18160]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 191/1992

¶4

Nathu Ram @ Nathmal S/o Sheokaran, R/o Dhani Kakaryali Tan Baragaon, Police Station Guddha District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan

¶5

----Accused-Appellant

Versus

State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Nikhil Saini, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶11

Order

¶12

18/04/2024

¶13

The instant criminal appeal under Section 374 CrPC has been submitted by the appellant against the judgment dated 30.04.1992 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No.58/1988 by which the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 326 IPC and sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment with file of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo four months simple imprisonment.

¶14

Facts in brief of the case are that on 10.05.1988, the complainant Bhagwan Ram (PW-1) lodged a report (Ex.P-1) with Police Station Gudha District Jhunjhunu alleging therein that some civil dispute with regard to the land was pending between the brothers before the Court and during the proceedings of that matter, the Girdawar and Patwari came to measure the land in the presence of villagers and at the time of the measurement of the

(2 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JP:18160]

[CRLA-191/1992]

said land all of sudden Nathu Ram (appellant) came and there was hot talk between him and Girdawar and in the said hot conversation, the accused inflicted an injury on the stomach of Sawarmal by knife. After sustaining the injury, Sawarmal became unconscious and he was taken to hospital. Upon this report, the FIR was registered under Section 326 IPC and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant under Section 307 IPC.

¶19

After completion of investigation, the Investigating Agency submitted charge-sheet against the appellant for the offence under Section 307 IPC and thereafter, the trial Court framed charges against the appellant for the offence under Section 307 IPC, who pleaded no guilt and claimed trial.

¶20

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited certain documents. Thereafter, the statements of the appellant were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein the appellant denied his participation in the incident and he submitted that on account of land dispute, he has been falsely implicated in this case, but in defence no evidence was produced. Upon conclusion of trial, the trial Court vide judgment dated 30.04.1992, acquitted the appellant from the charge under Section 307 IPC but convicted him for the offences punishable under Section 326 IPC and sentenced him as stated above vide judgment dated 30.04.1992.

¶21

Hence this criminal appeal before this Court.

¶22

At the threshold, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction. Since the occurrence is related to the year 1988 and at the time of incident,

[2024:RJ-JP:18160]

[CRLA-191/1992]

(3 of 4)

age of the appellant was around 30 years, now the age of appellant is around 70 years. Counsel submits that the appellant has suffered sentence for a considerable time out of the total sentence. He therefore prays that the sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offence be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶27

On the other hand, Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. The Public Prosecutor submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the appellant nor any compassion or sympathy is called in the said case. 8. I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as the judgment passed by the trial Court regarding the conviction of the appellant.

¶28

This fact is not in dispute that the occurrence pertains to the year 1988 and the appellant has undergone the sentence for a considerable time out of the total sentence and he has also suffered mental agony and trauma of protracted trial, thus looking to the overall circumstances and looking to the fact that the appellant has remained in custody for a considerable time, which would be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial Court for the offences under Section 326 IPC is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant.

¶29

Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Alister Anthony Pareira vs State of Maharashtra reported in 2012(2) SCC 648 has granted the similar benefit of probation to the accused who suffered mental agony and the sentence awarded to him was reduced to the period already undergone by him.

[2024:RJ-JP:18160]

[CRLA-191/1992]

(4 of 4)

Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed while maintaining the appellant’s conviction for the offences under Section 326 IPC. The sentence awarded to him for the said offences is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The amount of fine is hereby maintained. Three months time is granted to the appellant to deposit the fine amount before the trial Court.

¶34

In case of default in payment of fine, the appellant shall further undergo one month’s simple imprisonment.

¶35

Since the appellant is on bail, he is not required to surrender. His bail-bonds is not discharged.

¶36

In view of the provisions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C., the appellant is directed to furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court within a period of six weeks form today, which shall be effective for a period of six months with the stipulation that in the event of Special Leave to Appeal / Criminal Appeal is submitted against this judgment or on grant of leave, the petitioner on receipt of notice thereof, shall appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶37

Record of the trial Court be sent back forthwith.

¶38

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶39

MR/4

Nathu Ram @ Nath Mal v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nathu Ram @ Nath Mal v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalpana Verma D/O Shri Radhey B/C Jatav Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishal @ Haboo S/O Shri Ganesh Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Lakhan S/O Late Shri Rambharos B/C Harijan Vs Chandana W/O Shri Lakhan D/O Mangatram B/C Harijan

Abhay Mal Bohra Son of Janesh Mal Bohra Vs State of Rajasthan-State

Bunty Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Khubi Lal Sharma Son of Shri Radha Krishan Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan