In Criminal Revision No. 141 of 1994, the High Court dismissed a revision petition preferred by the accused against orders reducing conviction probation terms, finding no illegality in the lower courts' findings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 141 of 1994
Revisionist :- Radhey Shyam Opposite Party :- State And Other Counsel for Revisionist :- Shamimul Hasnain Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
List has been revised. Learned counsel for the revisionist and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 are no present to argue the revision. However, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. is present.
Heard learned A.G.A. for the State.
This revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13.01.1994 passed by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1992 (Radhey Shyam & Another v. Prem Chandra and Another), whereby appeal against order dated 30.01.1992 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Allahabad in Case No. 2256 of 1991 (Prem Manu Tiwari v. Chandra Nath Tiwari & Others) was allowed in part. Vide impugned order dated 30.01.1992 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Allahabad, the accused Radhey Shyam (revisionist) and Chandra Nath Tiwari were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, but were released on probation for a period of three years. Vide impugned order dated 13.01.1994 passed by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1992, the probation period of the accused was reduced to one year from three years.
The ground for preferring this revision is that learned courts below have passed the impugned order without appreciating the evidence and material brought on record.
Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 11.01.1983 at about 08.00 A.M., accused Chandra Nath Tiwari, Suresh Kumar, Radhey Shyam (revisionist) and Chandra Bhan assaulted Tribhuwan Nath Tiwari, uncle ( 'chacha' ) of informant Prem Chandra Tiwari (opposite party no. 2), due to which he sustained injury. Statement of injured Tribhuwan Nath Tiwari is corroborated by medical report.
Perused the impugned order passed by the courts below. I find no illegality in the impugned orders.
Resultantly, the instant revision is dismissed .
Order Date :- 9.5.2018 I. Batabyal
Radhey Shyam
State
Umesh Chandra Tripathi
I. Batabyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
