SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Subratodas vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 1 March, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 216/2018

Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur
—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.
—-Respondent

Connected With
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 103/2018
Shiv Bahadur S/o Shri Bhakta Bahadur, R/o 194, Sushilpura,
Ajmer Road, Jaipur, Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 105/2018
Dabar Singh Negi S/o Late Shri Umrao Singh Negi, R/o Village
Babliya, Post Pattharkhola Patti Malla Chakot, Tehsil Bhikayasain,
District Almoda, Uttarakhand.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 188/2018
Viren Barman Son Of Shri Shyam Sundar Barman, By Caste
Rajvansi Bangali, R/o A-39, Hari Nagar, Sushilpura, Ajmer Road,
Sodala, Jaipur Rajasthan
(2 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2. Subratodas Son Of Late Shri Harnathdas, By Caste Bengali
Kayasth, R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41,
Shivpur, Howrah, West Bengal-711306

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 189/2018
Biren Barman S/o Harendra Nath Barman, R/o Village Hakakura,
Madhapur, Distt. Kooch Bihar, West Bengal.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal-711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 190/2018
Ravindra Barman S/o Shri Debru Barman, B/c Bangali, R/o 148,
Hathroi, Ajmer Road, Jaipur Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 191/2018
Vishwajeet Roy S/o Dudheshwar Roy, R/o 1-2, Shiv Vihar Colony,
Sushilpura, Sodala, Jaipur Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
(3 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 192/2018
Pratap Das S/o Ramdayal Das, B/c Punjabi, R/o- 11, Maa
Shakambhari Nagar, Sushilpura, Ajmer Road, Sodala, Jaipur Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 193/2018
Ravindra Nath Roy S/o Jitendra Nath Roy, R/o Plot No. 234, Shiv
Colony, Sushilpura, Sodala, Jaipur Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal-711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 194/2018
Nagendra Nath Roy S/o Pushpnath Roy, B/c Bangali, R/o R-4,
Yudhisthar Marg, C-Scheme, Police Station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur
(Raj.)

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 195/2018
Shyamal Das S/o Shri Nitesh Chand Das, R/o 5-C, Opposite
Laxmi Mandir Cinema Hall, Tonk Road, Jaipur Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus
(4 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

1. State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal-711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 217/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 218/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 219/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 220/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur
(5 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 221/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 222/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Hawda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 223/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 224/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Howda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur.

—-Petitioner
(6 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.
—-Respondent

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 225/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 226/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 227/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 228/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
(7 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 229/2018
Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bangali, R/o 51/1/1,
Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur, Havda, West Bengal
711306. At Present The Accused Is Confined In The Central Jail,
Jaipur

—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 339/2018
Molina Roy W/o Shri Manoranjan, B/c Bengali, R/o 222, Shiv
Colony, Sushilpura, Ajmer Road, Sodala, Jaipur Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 340/2018
Mahadev Adhikari S/o Shri Mangal Adhikari, B/c Bengali, R/o
234, Shiv Colony, Sushilpura, Ajmer Road, Sodala, Jaipur Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

—-Respondents
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 341/2018
Prabha Barman W/o Shri Ram Joy Barman, B/c Bangali, R/o 105,
Hanuman Vatika, Villa Town, Near Shiv Colony, Sushilpura,
Sodala, Jaipur Raj.

                                                      ----Petitioner
Versus
(8 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

2. Subratodas S/o Late Shri Harnathdas B/c Bengali Kayasth,
R/o 51/1/1, Nabanari Tala, First By Lane, 41, Shivpur,
Howrah, West Bengal 711306.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Jindal with Mr. Ashindra
Gautam, Adv.

For Complainant : Mr. Ganga Ram Sharma, Adv.
For State : Mr. Arvind Kr. Chawla, PP.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Order

01/03/2019

1. Revision Petition Nos.216/2018, 217/2018, 218/2018,

219/2018, 220/2018, 221/2018, 222/2018, 223/2018, 224/2018,

225/2018, 226/2018, 227/2018, 228/2018 and 229/2018 have

been preferred by the accused-petitioner whereas revision petition

Nos.103/2018, 105/2018, 188/2018, 189/2018, 190/2018,

191/2018, 192/2018, 193/2018, 194/2018, 195/2018, 339/2018,

340/2018 and 341/2018 have been preferred by the

complainants.

2. Accused Petitioner has preferred Revision Petitions

aggrieved by the order dated 27.04.2017 passed by the

Metropolitan Magistrate No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan whereby the

petitioner has been convicted for offences under Section 420, 406

and 120B of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo three years

rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 420 IPC with a

fine of Rs. 50,000/-, on non-payment whereof petitioner has to

undergo two months simple imprisonment. For offence under

Section 406 IPC petitioner has been sentenced to undergo two
(9 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

years rigorous imprisonment and for offence under Section 120B

IPC to undergo six months simple imprisonment. Fine has been

directed to be paid to the complainant and against the judgment

and order dated 05.10.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions

Judge, No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan whereby appeal preferred by the

petitioner was rejected whereas complainant has preferred

Revision Petitions for enhancement of sentence.

3. It is contended by the Counsel for the accused

petitioner that there are serious infirmities in the impugned orders

passed by the Courts below. The deposit as per the complaint was

taken by the Company. There is no evidence to show that the

amount was received by the petitioner. It is contended that

Company has not been made as an accused in the case and the

conviction of the petitioner was thus bad in law. It is contended

that prior to the date of maturity, complainants have filed

complaints as a result of which, the amount could not be refunded

to the complainants. In the alternative it is contended that the

petitioner has been sentenced to three years rigorous

imprisonment in all the cases and since all the cases were decided

on the same date and pertain to same offence the sentence should

be directed to run concurrently.

4. Counsel for the accused petitioner in this respect has

placed reliance on judgment of this Court in Sanjay Sharma Vs.

Nirmala Dadhich- S.B.Criminal Revision Petition

No.179/2016 and connected revision petitions decided on

10.04.2017 and judgment of this Court in S.B.Criminal

Revision Petition No.452/2017- Indraj Singh Vs. State of
(10 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

Raj. and other connected revision petitions decided on

31.07.2017. Reliance has also been placed on V.K.Bansal Vs.

State of Haryana Anr. (2013) 7 Supreme Court Cases 211

wherein the Apex Court has held that Courts have the discretion

to direct the sentence to run concurrently. Reliance has also been

placed on 2017(1) WLC(SC) Cri.461-Benson Vs. State of

Kerala wherein the Apex Court directed the sentences to run

concurrently.

5. Counsel for the complainant-petitioners have contended

that the sentence imposed should be enhanced, prayer is made

that the maximum sentence of 7 years rigorous imprisonment be

imposed for offence under Section 420 IPC and three years

rigorous imprisonment be imposed for offence under Section 406

IPC. Prayer is also made for increasing the fine amount. It is

contended that the police after due investigation came to the

conclusion that the offence is made out against three persons;

present accused, his wife and Bhaskar Lehari, Director of the

Company, against whom trial is pending before the Courts below.

It is contended that accused has cheated as many as 523 persons

and the total amount is to the tune of about Rs. 1,32,01,000/-.

6. I have considered the contentions.

7. So far as revision petitions filed by the complainants

are concerned, considering the fact that none of the complainant

has deposed that the amount was paid directly to the accused and

also taking note of the fact that Company has not been made an

accused, I do not find anything wrong in the quantum of sentence

imposed, hence, the sentence imposed cannot be enhanced.

                                   (11 of 13)           [CRLR-216/2018]

8. Consequently revision petitions filed by the

complainants are dismissed.

9. However, as far as revision petitions filed by the

accused are concerned, since the petitioner during the course of

argument has not pressed the impugned orders on merit and his

only contention is that the sentences be directed to run

concurrently in view of the judgment relied upon by the Counsel

for the accused, this Court does not deem it proper to go into the

merits of the case and confine its order to the sentence.

10. This Court in Indraj Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

(supra) was ceased with a similar type of matter, therein the

petitioner was convicted for offences under Section 420, 406 IPC

and Chit Fund Act. This Court after discussing the various

judgments of the Apex Court and Rajasthan High Court partly

allowed the revision petitions and directed the sentences to run

concurrently. Similar was the view taken by this Court in Sanjay

Sharma Vs. Nirmala Dadhich (supra) where the conviction in

different cases was under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the

Court directed the sentences to run concurrently.

11. The Apex Court in V.K.Bansal Vs. State of Haryana

(supra) was also dealing with the cases under the Negotiable

Instrument Act. The Apex Court directed the sentence to run

concurrently. The Apex Court in Benson Vs. State of Kerala

(supra) was dealing with the matters pertaining to theft and

observed that there was nothing wrong in the quantum of

sentence imposed in respect of the respective crimes. However,

going by the sentence calculation, the sentence imposed in
(12 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

respect of the first crime started w.e.f. 20.11.2003 and the last

sentence would be over by 19.08.2022, which would effectively

mean that the total length of sentences in aggregate would be

around 19 years. In the case before the Apex Court the sentence

in respect of 8th crime was running against the appellant. The

Court directed that sentence in respect of crime Nos. 9 to 12

would run concurrently with the sentence imposed in crime No.8.

12. In the present case in hand, the sentence which has

been passed would run for 42 years if the same is not directed to

run concurrently as the sentence imposed in each of the case is

three years rigorous imprisonment.

13. In view of the judgment of this Court and Apex Court

and the peculiar facts of this case, also taking note of the fact that

the Company was not made an accused and none of the

complainants have deposed that the amount was paid directly to

the petitioner, I deem it proper to partly allow the revision

petitions.

14. The revision petitions are partly allowed. While

upholding the judgment of conviction passed by the Courts below,

it is directed that the substantive sentences passed against the

petitioners in the above cases would run concurrently. However,

the petitioners would be required to to pay the fine imposed by

the Court and in default of payment of fine to undergo the

sentences awarded in default of payment of fine. Sentence in lieu

of non-payment of fine would run consecutively.

(13 of 13) [CRLR-216/2018]

15. The Revisions Petitions filed by accused petitioner are

accordingly partly allowed whereas the Revision Petitions filed by

the complainant are dismissed.

16. The applications for suspension of sentence also stand

disposed.

17. Copy of the order be placed in each file.

18. Record of the Court below be returned forthwith.

19. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court by

fax/email today itself with a direction to serve a photostat copy of

the same to the petitioner and an additional copy of this order be

also sent to the concerned Court by ordinary process.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J.

N.Gandhi/76-102

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation