The court may reduce a sentence based on the time already served and the circumstances of the case, while maintaining the conviction.

Judgment

Instant revision petition under Section 397 /401 Cr.P.C . has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 24.04.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Raisinghnagar, District Anoopgarh (Sriganganagar Judicial Area) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellate court’) in Criminal Appeal No.17/2024 (CIS No.17/2024) by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 15.10.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’) in Criminal Case No.166/2009, whereby, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the present petitioner as under : S.No. Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in default of fine

1. Sec. 148 IPC 1 year SI

Rs.500/- 15 days SI

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

Brief facts of the case are that on 25.04.1997, complainant Jodha Ram filed a complaint at Police Station Raisinghnagar to that effect that the petitioner and other accused persons came armed with lathi and gandasi with the intention to illegally encroach upon the disputed agriculture land and caused injuries to the complainant and his family members. On the said complaint, Police registered the FIR against the accused persons including the petitioner and started investigation.

On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused persons including the petitioner. Thereafter, the trial court framed charges. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited certain documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused persons including the petitioner were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C .

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 15.10.2013 convicted and sentenced the accused persons including the petitioner for aforesaid offences.

Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 24.04.2024.

Hence, this revision petition.

At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence is related to the year 1997 and out of total sentence of three years S.I., the accused petitioner has already served about eight months of imprisonment, therefore, it is prayed that the sentence awarded to petitioner for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused- petitioner and submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused petitioner nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case.

I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the courts below regarding conviction of the accused-petitioner.

Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 1997 and the petitioner has so far undergone a period of about eight months in custody, out of total sentence of three years, so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has remained behind the bars for a considerable time, it will be just and proper, if the sentence awarded by the trial court for the aforesaid offences and affirmed by the appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone.

Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is partly allowed.

While maintaining the petitioner’s conviction for offence under Sections 148, 323, 324, 325 , 447 IPC , th