Partly allowed

Babli Alias Raman Son of Matoli v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Apr 2025CRLR/516/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court reduced the sentence of petitioners convicted under Sections 326/149 IPC to the period already undergone, citing a compromise between parties, long trial duration, and financial hardship. Petitioners were released forthwith, maintaining the conviction.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to period already undergone; petitioners released forthwith with bail bonds discharged.

Babli Alias Raman Son of Matoli Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:15061]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 516/2025

¶4

Babli Alias Raman Son Of Matoli

¶5

Ramdayal Son Of Matoli

¶6

Parasram Son Of Matoli

¶7

Rajesh Alias Laxminarayan Son Of Matoli All are Residents of Village Barkheda Police Station Bayana District Bharatpur (Accused In Sub Jail Bayana District Bharatpur)

¶8

----Accused-Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

For Petitioners	: Mr. Jai Raj Tantia, Adv. with Mr. Rohit Tantia,Adv.
For Respondent	: Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP
	Mr. Hari Prashad Jangid,Adv.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶14

Order

¶15

03/04/2025

¶16

This criminal revision petition under Section 438 read with Section 442 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been preferred by the revisionist-petitioners challenging the judgment dated 19.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Bayana, District Bharatpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Appellate Court') in Criminal Appeal No.20/2021 whereby learned Appellate Court while partly allowing the appeal filed by the revisionist-petitioners, has acquitted the accused-petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 324 read with 149 of IPC on the basis of

[CRLR-516/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:15061]

(2 of 5)

compromise arrived at between the parties. However, learned Appellate Court, while maintaining the conviction of the revisionist-petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 326 read with 149 of IPC, punished the revisionistpetitioners for one year's simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-.

¶21

Vide order dated 06.10.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bayana, District Bharatpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court') in Criminal Case No.361/2011 arising out of the FIR No.252/2004 registered at Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326 and 307 of IPC, revisionist-petitioners were convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable:-

¶22

Sr. No.	Name of Accused- Petitioner	Conviction under Section	Fine	Sentence
1.	1. Babli alias Raman 2. Ramdayal 3. Parasram 4. Rajesh alias Laxminarayan	148 IPC	Rs.10,000/-	3 Years' RI, in default 1 months' additional SI
2.	Parasram	326 IPC	Rs.50,000/-	7 Years' RI, in default 3 months' additional SI
3.	1. Babli alias Raman 2. Ramdayal 3. Rajesh alias Laxminarayan	326/149 IPC	Rs.50,000/-	7 Years' RI, in default 3 months additional SI
4.	1. Ramdayal 2. Parasram	324 IPC	Rs.25,000/-	3 Years' RI, in default 2 months additional SI
5.	1. Babli alias Raman 2. Rajesh alias Laxminarayan	324/149 IPC	Rs.25,000/-	3 Years' RI, in default 2 months additional SI

[2025:RJ-JP:15061]

[CRLR-516/2025]

(3 of 5)

Aggrieved of the impugned judgments and orders dated 19.03.2025 and 06.10.2017, the present petition has been filed by the revisionist-petitioners.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties submit that as the matter has been compromised between the parties and conviction against the revisionist-petitioners under Section 326 of IPC, has been maintained by learned Appellate Court, as the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 149 of IPC are non-compoundable. Since 19.03.2025 i.e. the date of impugned judgment passed by learned Appellate Court, the petitioners are in Sub-Jail, Bayana for serving their sentence.

¶28

Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners submits that the revisionist-petitioners are facing trial since 22.05.2004 i.e. almost for 20 years and the matter has already been compromised, therefore, learned counsel prays that looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, a liberal view be taken. Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners makes a limited submission that at this stage, the revisionist-petitioners do not want to challenge the finding of conviction against them, however, the present petition may be disposed of and the sentence awarded to the revisionist-petitioners may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶29

In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners has drawn attention of this Court towards the judgment passed by the Coordinate Benches of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the cases of Dana Ram S/o Rahing Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition

(4 of 5)

[2025:RJ-JP:15061]

[CRLR-516/2025]

No.793/2007) decided on 19.03.2025 and Bhanwar Nath &

¶34

Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition

¶35

No.1372/2017) decided on 24.05.2022.

¶36

Learned Public Prosecutor while vehemently opposing the prayer made on behalf of the revisionist-petitioners, produced their custody certificates dated 02.04.2025. As per the custody certificate dated 02.04.2025, the revisionist-petitioners No.1. Parasram has served the sentence of two months and three days, No.2. Ramdayal, No.3. Rajesh and No.4. Babli have served their sentences of one month and four days. The custody certificates of the revisionist-petitioners dated 02.04.2025 are taken on record.

¶37

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant admits the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties. 9. Considering the limited prayer made on behalf of the revisionist-petitioners and the fact that the parties have arrived at compromise and also, the fact that the petitioners are facing trial as well as financial hardship and mental agony for last twenty years, the present petition is liable to be partly allowed.

¶38

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the revisionist-petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 326 read with 149 of IPC, the sentence awarded to them is ordered to be reduced to the period already undergone by them. The revisionist-petitioners are ordered to be released forthwith. Their bail bonds stand discharged accordingly.

[2025:RJ-JP:15061]

[CRLR-516/2025]

(5 of 5)

Suspension of Sentence Application No.108/2025 and any other pending applications, also stand disposed of accordingly. 12. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial Court for compliance.

¶43

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶44

AARZOO ARORA /86-S.

Babli Alias Raman Son of Matoli v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babli Alias Raman Son of Matoli 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Trilok Chand S/O Narottam Das B/C Jatav Vs Guddi Devi W/O Trilok Chand D/O Shri Ram Dayal B/C Jatav

Ajeet Sharma S/O Daulal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Budharam and Anr.

Inder Ram Son of Chetram Vs State of Rajasthan

Balvir Singh S/O Shri Jalore Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ramswaroop S/O Late Shri Ramkaran Ghasal Vs State of Rajasthan