Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VIJAY SINGH versus STATE

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


VIJAY SINGH v STATE - CRLR Case No. 84 of 2005 [2007] RD-RJ 746 (6 February 2007)

//1//

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

ORDER

S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 84/2005

VIJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

DATE: 06.02.2007.

HON'BLE MR. K.S. RATHORE, J.

Mr. K.N. Sharma for the accused-petitioner.

Mr. Ashwani Kumar Sharma, PP for the State.

****

This revision petition under Section 397 r/w

Section 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment dated 14.06.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions

Judge No.1, Ajmer in Criminal Appeal No. 85/2004, whereby he dismissed the appeal of the accused- petitioner filed against the judgment dated 07.05.2004 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division) &

Judicial Magistrate No.5, Ajmer in Criminal Case No. 521/2003, by which the accused-petitioner has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

Under Section Simple imprisonment for three months 279 IPC and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days.

Under Section Simple imprisonment for one year and a 304-A IPC fine of Rs. 4,500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. //2//

Brief facts giving rise to the present revision petition are that on the basis of the written report submitted by the complainant Manu at Police

Station Srinagar, FIR No. 32/2003 was registered and investigation commenced. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused-petitioner and he was charged by the trial

Court for the offence under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC.

During trial the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 8 documents in support of its case. The statement of the accused petitioner under

Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein he denied the allegations levelled against him. After hearing the arguments of the respective parties, the trial Court vide its impugned judgment dated 07.05.2004 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner as indicated herein above. Against the said judgment dated 07.05.2004, the petitioner filed an appeal and the same was also dismissed by the Appellate Court vide order dated 14.06.2004.

Aggrieving and dissatisfying with the aforesaid judgment dated 07.05.2004 passed by the trial

Court and the judgment dated 14.06.2004 passed by the

Appellate Court, the accused-petitioner has preferred the present revision petition.

I have heard rival submissions of the respective parties and have also gone through the //3// relevant record as well as the impugned judgments passed by the trial Court and the Appellate Court.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner that the accused-petitioner has already remained in custody for about seven months and keeping in view the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharastra Vs. Jagmohan Singh Kuldeep Singh Anand & Others, reported in 2004(7) SCC 659, the accused- petitioner deserves to be let off on the period already undergone by him, but the fine imposed upon him is required to be enhanced to meet the ends of justice.

In the result, the present revision petition is partly allowed and the conviction of the accused- petitioner Vijay Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh under

Sections 279 and 304-A IPC is upheld and confirmed but the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him is reduced to the period already undergone by him and the fine is enhanced to Rs. 7,500/-, in default of payment of fine the accused-petitioner will have to undergo the sentence as awarded by the Appellate Court.

Record be sent back forthwith.

(K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.