RAMKUNWAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision petition, instituted under Sections 438 and 442 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, assails the judgment dated 05.08.2025 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jayal, District Nagaur, in Criminal Appeal Nos. 212323 (71/14), 06/15, 129/15 and 22/2023 (72/14), 3515 (242/15), wherein, while partly allowing the appeals, the appellate court set aside the order of sentence dated 28.10.2014 and remanded the matter to the trial court for reconsideration of the quantum of sentence after hearing the parties. The petition emanates from the conviction and sentence imposed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jayal, District Nagaur, in Criminal Original Case No.159/2011, wherein petitioners were convicted and sentenced as under:-

(2.) At the threshold, it is noted that the petition is barred by a period of 78 days. However, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed, and the delay in presenting the petition is hereby condoned. With the express consent of the parties, the petition is being heard and decided at the earliest opportunity, today itself.

(3.) The factual backdrop discloses that on the early morning of 29.04.2011, the complainants, Laxminarayan and Bhag Chand Bishnoi, were proceeding by motorcycle from Rotu to Jayal when, near a point two kilometers from Dugoli, they were purportedly alerted by the discharge of firearms. Upon approaching the source of the noise, they allegedly observed the accused at a distance, one of whom was armed, with a deer lying lifeless. Alarmed by the presence of the armed group, the complainants retreated and apprised the villagers, following which the SHO, P.S. Jayal, registered FIR No.41/2011 under Sections 9/51 of the Wildlife Protection Act and 3/25 of the Arms Act. Subsequent investigations culminated in the filing of charge sheets against Petitioners Nos.1 to 3 under Sections 9/51 and 3/25, and against Petitioner No.4 under Section 3/30 of the Arms Act. The trial court framed the charges, which the petitioners denied, and upon trial, twelve witnesses were examined, twenty-four documentary exhibits and one material exhibit were adduced, and the petitioners were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. whereafter they were convicted and sentenced as above. Hence the instant revision petition.