BABULAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two revision petitions, one from the jail and the other represented are preferred against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Merta, dated 18.1.1977 by which the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and his conviction and sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100.00 under section 392 I. P. C. were maintained.

(2.) The facts briefly stated are that on 16-10-1975 Ghissi and Kamla were grazing their she goats in the field of the outskirts of village Mithidi. The petitioner came there and wanted to take away one of the she goats. Ghissi protested and the petitioner pushed her aside and took away one of the goats. It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned lower court was in error in convicting the petitioner under section 392 I. P. C. because no hurt whatsoever was caused to Mst. Ghissi. More push would not necessarily cause any bodily pain within the meaning of section 319 I. P. C. This was not disputed by the learned Public Prosecutor but it was argued that the petitioner wrongfully restrained Ghissi. In my opinion mere push would not amount to wrongful restraint. As there was no evidence such as the petitioner checked the free movements of Ghissi in any manner whatsoever. In my opinion therefore, the petitioner, could not be held guilty of the offence under section 392 I.P.C. but he had surely committed an offence under section 379 I.P.C. This was not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It was next contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already suffered a detention for a period of about two months and the interest of justice would be met if the substantive sentences awarded to him is reduced to a term already undergone. I find considerable force in this submission. The learned Public Prosecutor could not advance any cogent argument against the reduction of the substantive sentence.

(3.) In the result, the revision petitions are dismissed but the substantive sentence of the petitioner is reduced to a term already undergone by him. The petitioner was also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100.00 which he shall deposit in the trial court within a period of one month failing which he will suffer the sentence awarded to him in default of payment of fine. Revision dismissed.