S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 762/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER Jhalam Singh Versus State of Rajasthan S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 762/2010 Date of Order : 09.12.2010 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI Mr. Sandeep Saruparia for the petitioner Mr. Anil Upadhyay – Public Prosecutor BY THE COURT By this revision petition, petitioner Jhalam Singh S/o Nathu Singh has challenged the judgment and order dated 19.10.2010 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand in Criminal Appeal No. 02/2008, whereby the learned appellate court has dismissed the appeal preferred by accused-petitioner against the judgment and order dated 18.01.2008 passed in Criminal Case No. 15/2005, whereby the accused-petitioner was convicted for the commission of offence under Section 279, 337, 304-A IPC and 134/187 of the Motor Vehicle Act and Page 1 of 5 S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 762/2010 sentenced as under :- Offence Sentence 279 IPC 6 months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 10 days' simple imprisonment 337 IPC 3 months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 5 days' simple imprisonment 304-A IPC One year's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days' simple imprisonment 134/187 Motor Vehicle Act Fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one day's simple imprisonment The facts of the case in the nutshell are that Constable Badri Lal of the Police Station Nathdwara submitted a written report to the effect that on that day he was going to serve an arrest warrant to Bhanwar Singh Charan. At 9.45 a.m. when he reached next to Gunjol Chauraha in front of Milap Marble Factory, he saw that a truck (turbo) being driven rashly and negligently coming from the side of Nathdwara towards Rajnagar went in the wrong side and hit a scooty coming from the side of Rajnagar and caused accident. The truck bearing No. RJ-27-G-9415 was being driven by Jhalam Singh, who fled away from the scene of occurrence leaving behind the truck. The person on the scooty was Pankaj S/o Mohan Lal Paliwal. He was injured and taken to the hospital for treatment, where he died due to above accident. Page 2 of 5 S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 762/2010 On the aforesaid report, a Criminal Case No. 397/2004 was registered and after usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed against accused Jhalam Singh for the offence under Section 279-337-304-A and 134/187 Motor Vehicle Act. Charges were framed against the accused- petitioner for the same offences, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses, namely, P.W.1 Majeed Mohammed, P.W.2 Sundar Lal, P.W.3 Prahlad, P.W.4 yadugopal, P.W.5 Lalit Joshi, P.W.6 Badri Lal, P.W.7 Laxman Lal, P.W.8 Dr. Bhupesh Partani, P.W.9 Dr. Kishan Dhanak. The incriminating evidence adduced against the accused was put to him for explanation under Section 313 CrPC. The accused produced no evidence in his defence. After hearing both the parties, learned trial court convicted the petitioner-accused and sentenced him as narrated above. Against the aforesaid judgment and order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nathdwara. Learned appellate court vide its judgment dated 19.10.2010 dismissed the appeal of the Page 3 of 5 S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 762/2010 petitioner and affirmed the judgment of the trial court. Aggrieved of the aforesaid order, the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner while arguing the case did not press the judgment of conviction and only made submissions on the point of sentence. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused- petitioner has remained behind the bars for more than one and a half months, therefore, his substantive sentence may be modified to the extent of sentence already served. Learned Public Prosecutor left the matter to the discretion of the court. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner has remained behind the bars for more than one and a half months since 19.10.2010, if the substantive sentence awarded to him is modified to the extent of the sentence already served by him, it may also satisfy the ends of justice. Accordingly, the revision petition filed by petitioner Page 4 of 5 S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 762/2010 Jhalam Singh S/o Nathu Singh against the judgment and order dated 19.10.2010 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand in Criminal Appeal No. 02/2008 is partly allowed and while affirming the judgment of conviction, the order of substantive sentence passed against the petitioner is modified to the extent of sentence already undergone by him. However, the fine and the sentence in default of payment of fine is maintained. [KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI],J. Pramod Page 5 of 5