[2026:RJ-JP:2208]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 828/2008 Ugam Singh S/o Shri Mahendra Singh, R/o Village Ratanpura, Police Station Beawar, District Ajmer (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naveen Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, Addl. G.A.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

Order

19/01/2026

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 – Ugam Singh against the Judgment and Order dated 28.07.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge no. 2, Ajmer (Raj.) (hereinafter referred to as "appellate court") in Criminal Appeal No. 283/2007(311/2007) (Ugam Singh vs. State of Rajasthan) vide which criminal appeal filed by the accused- petitioner has been partly allowed and the Judgment and Order dated 26.09.2007 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, City- North, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as "trial court") in Criminal Case no. 58/07(141/93) (State of Rajasthan vs. Ugam Singh) convicting the petitioner for the offence under Sections 379 & 420 of I.P.C. has been affirmed but the sentence has been modified as indicated below:-

Offence Sentence awarded by Sentence awarded by the trial court the appellate court under to undergo 2 years' R.I. to undergo 1 year S.I. with Section with fine of Rs. 5,000/- in fine of Rs.5000/-, in

379 IPC default of payment of fine, default of payment of fine, to further undergo 3 to further undergo 3 months' S.I. months' S.I.

under to undergo 2 years' S.I. to undergo 1 year S.I. with Section with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in fine of Rs.5000/-, in

420 IPC default of payment of fine, default of payment of fine, to further undergo 3 to further undergo 3 months' S.I. months' S.I.

2. Facts of the case in short are that on 25.12.1992, complainant- Rameshwar Dayal (PW-4) submitted a tehriri report (Ex. P/3) in the Police Station- Civil lines, to the effect that he is the resident of Meharadasi, District Jhunjhunu. An unknown person came to him disclosing his name as R.N. Chaudhary and stated that he is from Ajmer and gets the people recruited in Indian Army in Rs. 20,000/- per person. On 02.05.1992, complainant and five persons namely Mahaveer, Subhash s/o Bheraram, Subhash s/o Bishna Ram, Suresh and Vijay Singh took Rs. 1 lakh in a bag and came to Ajmer with R. N. Chaudhary. All the five persons were made to sit at Bus stand with the bag and R.N. Chaudhary took complainant towards BRO and he was made to sit at a tea shop. The complainant waited there for quite long time, but Mr. Chaudhary didn't come back and took away the bag of Rs. 1 lakh by deceiving 5 persons. On the basis of said report, F.I.R. No. 239/92 was registered at Police Station Civil lines, Ajmer for the offence under Sections 420 & 406 I.P.C. and investigation was commenced. After investigation, police submitted challan against the accused-petitioner for the offence under Section 420 of IPC before the concerned court. Charges were framed against the accused persons for the offence section 420/379 of IPC, who denied the same and claimed for trial. After conclusion of trial, the trial court passed the judgment and order dated 26.09.2007 convicting and sentencing him for the offence under Section 379 & 420 IPC as indicated above. Aggrieved by judgment of conviction and sentence dated 26.09.2007, accused-petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court and the appellate court vide its judgment dated 28.07.2008 while partly allowing the appeal, affirmed the judgment and order passed by the trial court qua conviction but reduced the sentence, as mentioned above.

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 want to press instant revision petition challenging judgments passed by the courts below qua conviction and prefers