IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. S.B.Cr.Appeal.No.495/2005. Dilshad @ Ansar Versus. State of Rajasthan. Date of Judgment: 21.5.2009. Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mahesh Chandra Sharma. Mrs.Shashi Chaudhary for the appellant. Mr.Pradeep Srimal P.P. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 20.1`2.2004 passed by the Addl.Sessions Judge (Fast Track)No.2,Jaipur City Jaipur in Session Case No.18/2003 whereby he convicted and sentenced the accused appellant as under:- For the offence under Section 450 IPC for five years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- ..2.. in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month simple imprisonment. For the offence under Section 394 IPC for five years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- in default of payment of fine, to undergo two months additional simple imprisonment. The brief facts of the case are that on the basis of Parcha Bayan of Smt.Tamu Devi complainant the police registered a criminal case FIR No.63/2002 for offence under Section 458 IPC at Police Station Nahargarh Road, Jaipur on the incident took place on the very day and investigation started. After investigation the police submitted a charge sheet against the accused for offence under Section 450 and ..2.. 394 IPC before the court of Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dvn.,) & Judicial Magistrate No.16, Jaipur City, Jaipur who committed the case to the court of Sessions Judge Jaipur District. The learned Sessions Judge transferred the case to the Court of Addl.Sessions Judge (Fast Track)No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur who framed charges against the accused appellant under Section 450 & 494 IPC. The charges were read over and explained to the accused appellant who denied all the allegations and claimed for trial. The statement of accused appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. During trial, the prosecution in support of its case examined as many as twelve witnesses and got exhibited some documents. ..3.. After hearing both the parties, the trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellant as indicated above vide it's order dated 20.12.2004. Aggrieved against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court dated 20.12.2004, the accused appellant has preferred the present appeal with the prayer to quash the same. In this appeal during the course of arguments, without going into the merit of the case Mrs.Shashi Chaudhary Advocate appearing on behalf of the accused appellant has made a request to this Court that she is not challenging the conviction part of the judgment of trial court, but she is only requesting to this Court that the sentence awarded by the trial court for both the offences were for 5 years and the ..4.. accused appellant has remained in judicial lockup for four years eight months and twenty days. Hence the accused petitioner should be released on the sentence already undergone. Learned Public Prosecutor has controverted the arguments advanced by the counsel for the appellant. I have heard learned counsel for the accused appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have also scanned the the judgment of the trial court and I find the appellant was rightly convicted under Section 307 IPC. Reasons given by learned trial court are cogent and valid and I do not see any ground to differ from them. I therefore, maintain the conviction of appellant under Section 450 & 394 IPC. ..5.. I accordingly, dismissed this appeal while upholding the conviction of appellants under Section 450 & 394 IPC, but I direct the concerning authority to give benefit of Section 432 Cr.PC to the appellant in accordance with law. The judgment and order dated 20.12.2004 passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, (Fast Track)No.2,Jai0pur City, Jaipur is modified to the extent as indicated above. Appeal dismissed. (Mahesh Chandra Sharma)J. k.