Partly allowed

Suraj v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 May 2024CRLR/209/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Rajasthan allowed partial relief. The court upheld the conviction under the Rajasthan Excise Act but reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioner and waived the fine.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to period undergone; fine waived; petitioner released if not required in another case.

Suraj Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:21034]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 209/2024

¶4

Suraj S/o Shri Havji, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Sukheda P.s Pipaloda District Ratlam At Present Talai Mohalla Pratapgarh ( At Present Lodged In District Jail Pratapgarh)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. SK Mehar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶11

Judgment

¶12

10/05/2024

¶13

Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 19.08.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Criminal Appeal No.32/2023 by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 07.02.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh in Cr. Case No.1151/2021, whereby, the learned trial court convicted the petitioner for offence under Section 16/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act and sentenced him to undergo two years S.I. along with a fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months simple imprisonment.

¶14

Brief facts of the case are that on 03.09.2021, complainant Arvind Kumar, Head Constable, submitted a written report at Police Station Pratapgarh to the effect that upon receiving a secret information, he along with Police team reached at Gopalpura Khal

[2024:RJ-JD:21034]

[CRLR-209/2024]

(2 of 4)

and apprehended a person standing there having a white container. On inquiry, the said person disclosed his name as Suraj (present petitioner) and upon checking the container, 20 bottles of handmade liquor were recovered without any valid licence and permit. On the said report, Police registered the case against the petitioner and started investigation.

¶19

On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused-petitioner. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charge against the accused-petitioner, who denied the charge and claimed trial.

¶20

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined six witnesses and also got exhibited certain documents. Thereafter, statement of the accused-petitioner was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶21

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 07.02.2023 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner for offence under Section 16/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act.

¶22

Aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 19.08.2023. Hence this revision petition.

¶23

At the threshold, counsel for the petitioner does not challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that the occurrence relates back to year 2021 and the petitioner has so far suffered a sentence of about eleven months, out of total sentence of two years S.I. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the substantive sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner for the

[2024:RJ-JD:21034]

[CRLR-209/2024]

(3 of 4)

offence under Section 16/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶28

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.

¶29

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.

¶30

It is not disputed that the occurrence has taken place in the year 2021 and the accused-petitioner has so far undergone a period of about eleven months incarceration, out of total sentence of two years S.I., and so also suffered the mental 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 time, it will be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Section 16/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act and affirmed by the appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶31

Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the petitioner’s conviction for offence under Section 16/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act, the sentence awarded to him for aforesaid offence is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The amount of fine is also waived. The petitioner is in jail. He be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.

[2024:RJ-JD:21034]

[CRLR-209/2024]

(4 of 4)

Application for suspension of sentence is also decided.

¶36

The record of the courts below, if received, be sent back

¶37

forthwith.

¶38

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶39

9-MS/-

Suraj v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj v. State of Rajasthan

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

Naveen Bhatt Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Brij Kaur Vs State of Rajasthan

Sattar Ali Vs State and Ors.

Dharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Parvej @ Moti Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajkumar @ Sonu Vs State of Rajasthan