Sentence reduction is permissible when the offence is non-violent, involves property of limited value, the accused has no criminal antecedents, and has already undergone a substantial period of incarceration during prolonged litigation.

Order

1. The present criminal revision petition is preferred under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), assailing the judgment dated 12.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapasan, District Chittorgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 01/2023 (229/2015), whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment and sentence dated 24.09.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kapasan in Regular Criminal Case No. 23/2010, arising out of FIR No. 35/2010, Police Station Akola, District Chittorgarh, convicting the petitioner for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the offence under Section 457 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the offence under Section 380 IPC, with further default stipulations, has been affirmed.

2. At the outset, the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 289 days in filing the present revision petition is taken up for consideration. It is averred therein that during the relevant period the petitioner was in judicial custody and, therefore, could not take effective steps for filing the revision within the prescribed period of limitation. The explanation so furnished is supported by the record. This Court is satisfied that sufficient cause within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been made out. Accordingly, the delay of 289 days in filing the revision petition is condoned and the application stands allowed.

3. The revision petition is thereafter taken up for consideration on merits.

4. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that an incident of theft took place during the night hours in the year 2010, in which goats belonging to the complainant were stolen. On the basis of the report lodged, an FIR was registered and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner. The petitioner was put to trial and, upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial court, vide judgment dated 24.09.2015, convicted the petitioner for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him accordingly. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred a criminal appeal, which came to be dismissed by the learned appellate court vide judgment dated 12.11.2024, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court. Hence, the present criminal revision petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing the matter to some extent, does not press the revision petition on the question of conviction and confines the submissions to the quantum of sentence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the occurrence in question pertains to the year 2010 and the petitioner has remained entangled in criminal proceedings for a considerable length of time. It is urged that the petitioner has remained incarcerated in the present case for a period of more than 10 months during trial and after passing of the appeal and presently, he is in custody. It is submitted that the petitioner is not a habitual offender and there is no material on re