DAYA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the request of the parties the case is finally taken up for final hearing.

(2.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 22-10-1999 passed by the learned AddI. Sessions Judge No.2 Sri Ganganagar upholding the judgment and sentence awarded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Sri Ganganagar as follows: Under Section 279, I.P.C. To only a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to further undergo one month S.I. Under Section 337, I.P.C. To 3 months S.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default to further undergo 15 days S.I. Under Section 338, I.P.C. To 6 months R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to further undergo 1 month S.I. 2. The learned Counsel does not challenge the conviction of the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. However, I have gone through the judgment of the Appellate Court and the trial Court. I have also perused the record. The finding arrived at by two Courts below does not call any interference by this Court in its revisional jurisdiction.

(3.) It is submitted by Mr. Garg, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that in the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence awarded is excessive. This prayer has been opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my view, the ends of justice would meet if the sentence awarded is reduced to the period already undergone but, the fine imposed on each count is maintained.