This criminal revision against conviction and sentence for child labour was dismissed. The single judge found no infirmity, illegality, or perversity in the punishment imposed, as it was within the statutory minimum, and refused to interfere.
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. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 32 of 2002
Revisionist :- Jai Prakash Giri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- P.K. Kashyap,G.L. Bind,Sriprakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Shri S.P. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. on quantum of punishment.
This Criminal Revision has been filed against the conviction and sentence passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Room No.14, Varanasi in Appeal No. 290 of 2000 dated 18.12.2001 confirming the conviction and sentence of 3 months rigorous imprisonment passed by IVth A.C.J.M. Varanasi dated 18.11.2000 under Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 in Criminal Case No. 656 of 2000.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submits minimum punishment has been provided by the Additional Sessions Judge, Varanasi.
I have gone through the materials available on record and the impugned order too. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned Court below has taken much pain in analyzing the evidence adduced before him. Hence, the finding recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 14, Varanasi has no infirmity or illegality as minimum punishment provided under Section 14 of Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986.
In view of the discussion made above, I do not find any perversity or illegality in the order impugned and there is no justifiable ground for making any interference in it. Hence, revision fails and it is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Fhd.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the minimum punishment provided by the Additional Sessions Judge under the Child Labour Act is reasonable and free from perversity or illegality warranting revisional interference?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jai Prakash Giri
State of U.P.
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
