BANSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing these two Criminal Revision Petitions challenge has been made to the judgment dtd. 10/7/2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Pratapgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 39/2002, whereby the learned Appellate Court affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 3/7/2001 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh in Criminal Regular Case No. 490/1998; whereby the petitioners have been convicted and sentenced as under :--

(2.) Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant criminal revision petitions are that on 27/10/1998 at 6.20 p.m. complainant Praveen Pareek submitted a report to the SHO, Police Station Pratapgarh to the effect that in the night of 5/10/1998, some unknown persons broke into his shop named Pareek Sales Corporation situated at M.G. Road, in front of Samta Talkies and stole 3 bundles of wire, Motor Bush, 3 silver coins and Rs.400.00 cash. On the basis of the aforesaid report, FIR No. 378/1998 was registered and after usual investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against petitioners. After conducting a full-fledged trial, the learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioners in the manner stated above vide judgment dtd 3/7/2001. The appeal preferred against the aforesaid judgment was dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dtd. 10/7/2002 while affirming the conviction and maintaining the sentence awarded to the petitioners. Hence, this revision petition is preferred by them.

(3.) After arguing the case on merits to some extent, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that he will not assail conviction of the petitioners and confine his arguments to the alternative prayer of reduction of the sentence awarded by the Trial Court. He submits that the incident in the present case pertains to the year 1998. The petitioners were 20 and 54 years of age at that time. Presently, they are aged 45 and 79 years respectively. The petitioners have already suffered agony of protracted trial for long 25 years. Petitioner Banshi has remained in custody for more than 6 months, while petitioner Shyam Lal has also remained in custody for few days. No fruitful purpose would be served by sending the present petitioners to jail at this stage. With these submissions, learned Counsel pray that by taking a lenient view, the sentence awarded to the petitioners may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.