Hem Raj v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
In this Criminal Revision, the Court modified the sentence in favor of the revisionist, allowing him to serve the period already undergone, while imposing an additional fine of Rs. 5,000 under Section 357 Cr.P.C. to be paid to the deceased's legal heirs.
What did the court decide?
Sentence modified to period undergone; fine increased to Rs. 5,000 payable to deceased's heirs under Section 357 Cr.P.C.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1246 of 2004
Revisionist :- Hem Raj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Lakshman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
The Criminal Revision has been filed against the order and judgment dated 04.02.2004 passed by Sessions Judge, Jalaun, Orai, dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 2003 in Crime No. 117 of 1997 under Section 279, 304-A I.P.C. confirming the conviction of revisionist under Section 279 & 304-A I.P.C. for a period of 3 month rigorous imprisonment and one years six months rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 1000/- in the offence in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment of three months convicted by Judicial Magistrate, Orai in Criminal Case No. 10 of 2003 and Case Crime No. 117 of 1997 (State Vs. Hamraj) under Section 279 & 304-A I.P.C., Police Station Ait, District Jalaun.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the opposite party-State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that matter is very old and he prays only with regard to the sentence. He further submitted that there is no serious injury. The revisionist has filed this revision against the impugned order passed by the court below in the year 2004 which has been heard today after laps of more than 15 years, hence in these circumstances, this Hon'ble Court may take lenient view and graciously modify the sentence awarded to him for the period undergone alongwith fine.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the sentence during the pendency of the revision should be modified with additional fine under Section 357 Cr.P.C.
Coram
Suresh Kumar Gupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLR/1246/2004
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court