##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:18083]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 999/2005

Ganesh Lal S/o Bakhtawar Lal Ahir, aged 70 years, by caste Ahir, resident of 71, Alipura, Police Station Bhopalpura, Udaipur.

(Presently lodged in Central Jail, Udaipur)

----Petitioner Versus

The State of Rajasthan ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Shivangi Pathak For Respondent(s) : Mr. NS Chandawat, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

17/04/2026

1. The instant criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 of the CrPC has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved of the judgment dated 10.11.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No.17/2005, dismissing the appeal preferred against the judgment dated 17.08.2004 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udaipur in Regular Criminal Case No.78/2003, whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum imprisonment of one year’s SI along with a fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 304 (A) of IPC and lesser punishment for the other

offences under Section 279 of IPC.

2. Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant criminal revision are that As per the prosecution case, on 29.10.1996, the complainant Abdul Rahim

(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 03:01:25 PM)

(Downloaded on 01/05/2026 at 08:34:44 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:18083] (2 of 5) [CRLR-999/2005] reported that he was driving truck No. RJ-27 G-1208 and had parked it on the roadside near Amar Marble. At that time, the driver of another truck bearing No.RJ-09 (RJU-909) drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed and hit the parked truck, and also collided with a motorcycle bearing No.RJ-06 C-5556. As a result of the said accident, two persons died on the spot and others sustained injuries. On the basis of the report, FIR No. 684/96 was registered and investigation was conducted under Sections 279, 337 and 304A of IPC. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused for offences under Sections 279 and 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code

before the Court.

3. The learned Magistrate framed charges against the petitioner for the above offences and upon denial of guilt by him, commenced the trial. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned trial court convicted the accused for offences under Sections 279 and 304 A of the IPC vide judgment dated 17.08.2004. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, he preferred an appeal, which was dismissed by the learned appellate court vide judgment dated 10.11.2005 affirming the judgment passed by the trial court.

Hence, this revision petition is filed before this court.

4. After arguing the case on merits to some extent, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he will not assail conviction of the petitioner and confines his arguments to the

(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 03:01:25 PM)

(Downloaded on 01/05/2026 at 08:34:44 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:18083] (3 of 5) [CRLR-999/2005] alternative prayer of reduction of the sentence awarded by the trial court. He submits that the incident in the present case pertains to the year 1996. The offences involved are rash or negligent driving and death by negligent act. The petitioner was a 70 years of age at the time of the incident. He has already suffered agony of protracted trial for 30 years. The maximum sentence awarded by the trial court is simple imprisonment of one year. He has already remained in custody for a period of more than 2 years and 1 month. He is an indigent person. With these submissions, learned counsel prays that by taking a lenient view, the sentences awarded to the petitioner may be reduced to the

period already undergone.

5. Learned public prosecutor has, of course, been able to defend the case on merits but does not refute the fact that th