Judgment

11/02/2025

1. The present revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed by the accused-petitioner - Shamim Khan against Judgment and Order dated 28.02.2014 passed by Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Cases) and Additional Sessions Judge, Jhalawar (hereinafter referred to as "appellate court") in Criminal Appeal No. 13/2014 (15/2012) (Shamim Khan vs. State of Rajasthan) vide which criminal appeal filed by the accused-petitioner against the Judgment and Order of Sentence dated 02.03.2012 passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pidawa, District Jhalawar (hereinafter referred to as "trial court") convicting and sentencing him for the offences under sections 279 & 304-A of I.P.C, was dismissed. The sentence awarded to the petitioner is as under:-

offence sentence fine sentence in default u/s 279 IPC 3 Months S.I - -

u/s 304-A IPC 1 year's S.I Rs. 1,000/- 1 month's S.I (All sentences were ordered to run concurrently)

2. Facts of the case in short are that on the basis of a report submitted by complainant - Ram Prasad Meena, A.S.I. Police Station Raipur (P.W. 4) with respect to an accident occurred on 13.02.2002, in which death of deceased Ramprasad and Bhagwan Singh took place on account of rash and negligent driving of offending truck, F.I.R. No.14/2002 was registered at Police Station Raipur, District Jhalawar for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 & 304-A of I.P.C. After conclusion of investigation, police submitted charge-sheet against accused-petitioner for the offences under Sections 279 & 304-A of I.P.C. The trial court framed charges for the aforesaid offences and trial was commenced. After conclusion of trial, the trial court passed judgment and order of sentence dated 02.03.2012 convicting and sentencing him for the offences under Sections 279 & 304-A of I.P.C., as stated above. Aggrieved by judgment of conviction and sentence dated 02.03.2012, accused-petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which passed the Judgment & Order dated 28.02.2014 dismissing appeal and affirming judgment of the trial court. Hence, this criminal revision petition has been preferred by the accused-petitioner.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. After arguing the matter on merits at some length, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner does not wish to press instant revision petition challenging judgments passed by the courts below qua conviction and prefers to make submissions on the point of sentence only.

5. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that incident in the present case took place way back in the year 2002 i.e. more than 22 years ago; accused-petitioner was 39 years of age at the time of incident and now he is around 61 years old and facing agony of trial since last more than 22 years; accused-petitioner who is sole bread earner in the family, belongs to poor strata of society and remained in custody for a period of more than four months and there is no previous conviction recorded against the accused-petitioner, therefore, he prays that ends of justice would meet if a lenient view is taken in the matter and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the accused-petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

6. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chander Shekhar vs. State of Rajasthan (Criminal Appeal No. 4161/2024) decided on 04.10.2024 and the judgments rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Shyamveer Singh vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 724/2003) decided on 15.05.2024, Smt. Sudesh Kumari vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1047/2005) decided on 09.10.2024, Mahesh Bhargava vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 737/2005) decided on 06.11.2024, Pappu vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 538/2005) decided on 21.08.2024, Annu @ Anw