Deva Vs. State of Rajasthan

Deva vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Mar 16, 2001

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/773003

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/773003
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: V.G. Palshikar, J.
Decided On: Mar 16, 2001
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 381 of 1985 Decided on 16th March, 2001 Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 307 and 307/34--Appeal against conviction--On reappreciation of evidence by the High Court in appeal, offence under Section 307 found made out against accused on bail--Held, it would be unjust to put the accused back in jail...

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Deva

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 2000WLC(Raj)UC107; 2002(2)WLN63

Excerpt

s.b. criminal appeal no. 381 of 1985 decided on 16th march, 2001 penal code, 1860 - sections 307 and 307/34--appeal against conviction--on reappreciation of evidence by the high court in appeal, offence under section 307 found made out against accused on bail--held, it would be unjust to put the accused back in jail after his having led peaceful life of ordinary citizen for 15 years--hence proper case for maintaining conviction but reducing sentence to that already undergone, order modified accordingly.;appeal allowed - .....themselves on the back side of hillock. when he saw them, they tried to run away. deva was armed with gun and others were armed with kulharis and lathis. deva fired a gun shot on the his head and back side and blood came out. after this, sukhlal and himmat singh came there and accused persons ran away. on this information, a case was registered under section 307/34 i.p.c. and challan was filed against deva and smt. vardi under section 307/34 i.p.c. and after trial accused vardi was acquitted and accused deva was convicted under section 307 i.p.c. and sentenced to one year's r.i. and rs. 500/- as fine and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' s.i.4. on reappreciation of the evidence, i find that the offence under section 307 i.p.c. is made out. the accused person is on bail for last about 15 years. to put him back in jail after appellant led peaceful life of ordinary citizen, would be rather unjust.5. hence, the appeal is partly allowed. the conviction under section 307 i.p.c. is maintained but the sentence is reduced to that already undergone. the impugned order is thus modified to the extent above.

Full Judgment

V.G. Palshikar, J.

1. This appeal is filed by the accused-appellant challenging the judgment dated 4.11.1985 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No. 41/85 convicting the appellant under Section 307 I.P.C. by sentencing him to undergo one year's R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months' S.I. on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal and as also canvassed before me.

2. With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the accused-appellants and learned Public Prosecutor I have scretinised the evidence on record and reappreciated the evidence on record.

3. The prosecution story as it emerges from reappreciation of the evidence on record is that; on 26.6.1984 at 9:45 a.m. an FIR was lodged by Shel Singh at Police Station, Rajsamand with the allegation that at the vary day at about 8 a.m. when he and one Bhali Ram both were going for labouring. When they reached near Dharmeta-ki-Bhagal then Kalu son of Nathu, Deva son of Kalu, Birma son of Kalu and Vardi wife of Kalu Bheel, residents of Pathol who were concealing themselves on the back side of hillock. When he saw them, they tried to run away. Deva was armed with gun and others were armed with Kulharis and Lathis. Deva fired a gun shot on the his head and back side and blood came out. After this, Sukhlal and Himmat Singh came there and accused persons ran away. On this information, a case was registered under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and challan was filed against Deva and Smt. Vardi under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and after trial accused Vardi was acquitted and accused Deva was convicted under Section 307 I.P.C. and sentenced to one year's R.I. and Rs. 500/- as fine and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' S.I.

4. On reappreciation of the evidence, I find that the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out. The accused person is on bail for last about 15 years. To put him back in jail after appellant led peaceful life of ordinary citizen, would be rather unjust.

5. Hence, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction under Section 307 I.P.C. is maintained but the sentence is reduced to that already undergone. The impugned order is thus modified to the extent above.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 2001 Same Parties Deva vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge V.G. Palshikar, J.

Criminal