This is a criminal revision under Section 397 Cr. P.C. where the High Court dismissed the petition filed by the complainant against a conviction and partial acquittal order passed by the Trial Court.
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. - 23
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3150 of 2003
Revisionist :- Babu Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Pramod Kumar Sharma,Harish Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,A.N. Bhargawa,Apul Misra
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard Sri Harish Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
It appears from the record that by the impugned order dated 16.7.2003, Trial Court convicted the accused respondent nos. 2 to 4 under Section 323 and 504 I.P.C. and sentenced them with imposing fine Rs. 800/- on each accused under Section 323 I.P.C. and fine Rs. 200/- on each accused under Section 504 I.P.C. but acquitted under Sections 506 and 308 I.P.C. in S.T. No. 137 of 2002, P.S. Katera, District Jhansi.
Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, complainant of Case Crime No. 27 of 2001 sought intervention of this Court by filing present revision.
Learned counsel for the revisionist assailed the impugned order by submitting that imposition of fine upon the accused persons is inadequate and acquittal of accused under Sections 504 and 506 is not merited but he could not point out any irregularity or illegality in the impugned order.
Learned AGA supported the impugned order and submitted that the order in question is quite correct. There is no illegality or irregularity in passing the impugned order. Acquittal of accused under Sections 506 and 308 I.P.C. and imposition of fine is fit and proper.
From perusal of impugned order and material available on record, I see no illegality or irregularity committed by the Court below in passing the impugned order, even the revisionist is not able to make a fit case so as to justify interference of this Court.
Revision is dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 1.5.2019 / Manoj
State Of U.P.
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
