Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:20431] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 634/2006
1. Ram Kuwar son of Chatur Nath
2. Patwari son of Anup Nath Both are residents of Sarwar Ward No.13, Police Station Sarwar, District Ajmer. ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Meena Bhargava, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dharka, PP Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP with Ms. Neha Goyal, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Order 14/05/2025
1. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1997 and the present criminal revision is pending since the year
2006.
2. This criminal revision petition under Sections 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment dated 20.06.2006, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.2, Alwar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Appellate Court’) in Criminal Appeal No.03/2006, whereby the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal of the accused- appellants. The learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class) Thanagazi Alwar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’) in Criminal Case No.305/1997, vide its order dated 16.03.2005 has convicted the accused-petitioners under Sections 9, 27, 29, 31 and 51 of Indian
[2025:RJ-JP:20431] (2 of 3) [CRLR-634/2006] Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 and sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment and also imposed a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months simple imprisonment.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the sentence so awarded to the revisionist-petitioners were suspended by this Court vide order dated 13.07.2006.
4.
Learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioners, however, makes a limited submission that the petitioners have already remained in custody for a period of 28 days, without making any interference on merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present revisionist-petitioners may be substituted with the period of sentence already undergone by them.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the same.
6. This Court is conscious of the judgments rendered in Alister Anthony Pareira Vs. State of Maharashtra : (2012) 2 SCC 648 and Haripada Das Vs. State of W.B. : (1998) 9 SCC 678, wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:- Alister Anthony Pareira (Supra)
“There is no straitjacket formula for sentencing an accused on proof of crime. The courts have evolved certain principles: twin objective of the sentencing policy is deterrence and correction. What sentence would meet the ends of justice depends on the facts and circumstances of each case and the court must keep in mind the gravity of the crime, motive for the crime, nature of the offence and all other attendant circumstances.” Haripada Das (Supra)
“…considering the fact that the respondent had already undergone detention for some period and the case is pending for a pretty long time for which he had suffered both financial hardship and mental agony and also considering the fact that he had been released on bail as far back as on 17-1-1986, we feel that the ends of justice
[2025:RJ-JP:20431] (3 of 3) [CRLR-634/2006] will be met in the facts of the case if the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone…”
7. In light of the limited prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent laws, the present criminal revision petition is allowed. Accordingly, while maintaining conviction of the petitioners for the offences under Sections 9, 27, 29, 31 and 51 of Indian Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, the sentence awarded to them are reduced to the period already undergone by them and fine imposed by the trial court is maintained. The petitioners shall deposit the amount of fine imposed upon them within a period of one month in the trial Court from today. The petitioners are on bail. They needs not to surrender. Their bail bonds stand discharged accordingly.
8. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Record of the learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava/Ashu/-10