-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T Omprakash Vs. State of Rajasthan S.B.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.362/1989 against the judgment dt.16.9.1989 passed by the Addl.Sessions Judge No.2, Sriganganagar, in Sessions Case No.12/1988. Date of Judgment: July 04, 2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DEO NARAYAN THANVI Mr.Rajendra Charan, for the appellant. Mr.L.R.Upadhyay, Public Prosecutor. BY THE COURT : 1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Sriganganagar, whereby he convicted accused appellant Omprakash for the offence u/s.324 IPC instead of Sec.307 IPC for which the accused was charged, and Section 27, Arms Act with one year's R.I. & a fine of Rs.200/- and 9 months' R.I. & a fine of Rs.200/- respectively. -2- 2. The charge against the accused appellant Omprakash after committal of the case was that on 26.5.1987 at 8 P.M., he fired near the house of Ganpat Ram, advocate on main road Chauraha to kill Narayan Das and Puran, whereby Narayan Das received injury on his back. Alongwith appellant Omprakash, Satpal was also charged for the offence u/s.307 IPC but he was acquitted by the learned trial Judge. The accused appellant Omprakash pleaded not guilty to the charges u/s.307 IPC and Sec.27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution examined 8 witnesses. The statement of the accused u/s.313 CrPC was recorded. After hearing the arguments, the learned trial Judge convicted & sentenced the accused as aforesaid. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in this appeal does not want to challenge the conviction. He simply submits that the incident is 21 years' old and the offence is only punishable with maximum three years imprisonment and the accused has already remained in custody for 18 days during trial. Therefore, he should either be granted benefit of probation or be sentenced to the period already undergone. 4. Keeping in view the nature of the offence and time period, I deem it proper to sentence the accused appellant Omprakash to the period already undergone. -3- 5. Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the accused appellant Omprakash for the offence u/s.324 IPC and Section 27, Arms Act, he is sentenced to the period already undergone. However, the fine imposed on both the counts shall remain intact, which the appellant shall deposit before the trial Court within a period of two weeks from today, failing which he shall undergo the sentence awarded in default of payment of fine. (DEO NARAYAN THANVI), J. RANKAWAT JK, PS