Revision upheld against conviction under IPC for rash driving causing death dismissed as infructuous due to death of the revisionist without application by legal heirs.
Revision dismissed as infructuous due to death of the revisionist without application by legal heirs.
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. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 389 of 1998
Revisionist :- Rampal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Vinod Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
This revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 27.02.1998 passed by learned IInd Additional District and Session Judge, Badaun in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1992 (Ram Pal Singh vs. State of U.P.), under Section 304 A IPC, arising out of judgment and order dated 15.07.1992 passed by Judicial Magistrate-I in Case No. 396 of 1987 (State vs. Ram Pal Singh), under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC, P.S. Usahat, District Badaun, whereby appeal filed by the revisionist has been dismissed.
Perusal of record shows that a case was registered against revisionist under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC and after trial revisionist was convicted under Section 304A IPC and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year along with fine of Rs. 500/- vide judgment and order dated 15.07.1992 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Badaun. Revisionist has preferred an appeal bearing no. 16 of 1992 against the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, however, the appeal came to be dismissed by learned IInd Additional District and Session Judge, Badaun vide order dated 27.02.1998 and conviction and sentence of revisionist was upheld.
None has appeared on behalf of the revisionist.
Notice was sent to revisionist to engage another counsel and as per report dated 21.11.2019 sent by C.J.M. Badaun, revisionist
Ram Pal Singh has expired. No application has been moved by legal heirs of revisionist Ram pal Singh to pursue this revision, hence no useful purpose would be served by deciding this revision on merits. As this revision was preferred against judgment of conviction, which was upheld by lower Appellate Court and revisionist has expired, thus revision has become infructuous.
Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed having become infructuous.
Order Date :- 2.1.2020 A. Tripathi
Raj Beer Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
