[2025:RJ-JP:25385] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 523/2007 Bal Chand S/o Rudmal Kumawat, Resident of Kumawati Ki Bagichi, Lohawada, Police Station Chomu, District Jaipur. (At present Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Accused/Petitioner Versus State ----Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Goyal, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Ashvin Garg, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, Dy.G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 09/07/2025 1. The instant criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment dated 24.05.2007 passed by learned Special Judge (Sati Nivaran) Rajasthan and Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as learned 'Appellate Court') in Criminal Appeal No.73/2006 whereby learned Appellate Court while dismissing the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner, upheld the order dated 16.08.2004 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.4, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as learned 'trial Court') in Criminal Case No.350/1994 whereby learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offences punishable as under:- [2025:RJ-JP:25385] (2 of 4) [CRLR-523/2007] i. Under Section 420 of IPC-Three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo three months' simple imprisonment, ii. Under Section 467 of IPC-Three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo three months' simple imprisonment, iii.Under Section 468 of IPC-Three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo three months' simple imprisonment & iv. Under Section 471 of IPC-Two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month's simple imprisonment. 2. As per the brief facts of the case, the petitioner was tried by learned trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC. During trial, as many as seven witnesses were examined and thirty documents were exhibited before learned trial Court. 3. The petitioner was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and examined one witness in his defence, however, vide the impugned judgment dated 16.08.2004, learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offences punishable as aforesaid. 4. Feeling aggrieved of the impugned judgment dated 16.08.2004 passed by learned trial Court, the petitioner preferred an appeal No.73/2006 before learned Appellate Court. Vide the impugned judgment dated 24.05.2007, learned Appellate Court, while dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner, upheld the impugned judgment dated 16.08.2004 passed by learned trial Court. Hence, the present criminal revision petition was filed. [2025:RJ-JP:25385] (3 of 4) [CRLR-523/2007] 5. At the threshold, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner does not want to challenge the finding of conviction for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner. 6. Admittedly, as the case in hand relates to an incident occurred in the year 1993; the petitioner was convicted and sentenced vide the impugned judgment dated 16.08.2004 passed by learned trial Court; the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by learned Appellate Court on 24.05.2007; the present petitioner has remained in custody for more than two months; and the present petitioner suffered the agony of trial, appeal and this petition, for more than 31 years, therefore, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner submitted that considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering the length of period of trial, appeal and revision petition, a liberal view be taken for the petitioner and the sentence awarded to the petitioner as aforesaid may be reduced and may be modified to the extent of sentence of imprisonment already undergone by him. 7. Per contra, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent-State opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. It is an undisputed fact that the occurrence of this case relates to the year 1993; age of the present petitioner is about 54 years; the petitioner has undergone the sentence of more than two months; the petitioner has suffered the agony and trauma of [2025:RJ-JP:25385] (4 of 4) [CRLR-523/2007] trial, appeal and this petition for 31 years and the present petition is pending since 2007. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussions and the fact that the petitioner has served the sentence of more than two months, the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner is accepted and the present petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the petitioner for the aforesaid offences, the sentence awarded against him is ordered to be reduced and modified to the extent of sentence already undergone by him. However, the amount of fine is hereby maintained. 11. It is ordered that the amount of fine i.e. Rs.17,000/- shall be deposited by petitioner before learned trial Court within a period of three months from passing of this order. It is also directed that in default of payment of fine by the petitioner, he shall undergo simple imprisonment of three months. 12. Any pending applications also stand disposed of. 13. Record of the Court below be sent back immediately. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J AARZOO ARORA /06