HANUMAN SAHAYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Although matter has come up for orders on application for suspension of sentence of the petitioner, but at the request of learned counsel for the parties, the arguments were heard and the revision petition is being disposed off finally.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that trial court as well as appellate court both have concurrently recorded a finding that the petitioner is guilty of offences under Sections 498-A and 406 Penal Code and there is no illegality in the findings of both the courts below, therefore, he does not challenge the order of conviction of the petitioner passed by the trial court and affirmed by appellate court, but in view of the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise in matrimonial dispute and a consent petition was filed and a decree of divorce was passed on the basis of compromise, therefore, sentence of simple imprisonment of one year, awarded by the trial court for each offence, i.e. under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC, may be reduced to a period of three months' simple imprisonment in both the offences.