Dismissed

Sateesh Chandra Verma v. State of U.P.and 2 Ors.

Allahabad HC18 May 2022CRLR/428/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition seeking review of a trial court judgment. The trial court had convicted an accused of murder but acquitted him of other charges and acquitted two other accused of murder. The High Court found no merit in the revision.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition was dismissed with no merit found in the challenge to the trial court's judgment and order.

Sateesh Chandra Verma Vs State of U.P.and 2… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 428 of 2007

¶3

Revisionist :- Sateesh Chandra Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 2 Ors Counsel for Revisionist :- Tej Bahadur Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abdul Rafey Siddiqui,Dhananjay Kr. Singh,Santosh Kr. Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

None appears on behalf of the revisionist even in the revised call.

¶6

Heard learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.

¶7

This revision under section 397 readwith section 401 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the Judgment and order dated 27-02-2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge,Ambedkar Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2002 and Sessions Trial No. 22 of 2002,arising out of Case Crime No. 288 of 2001, Police Station-Kotwali-Akbarpur, district-Ambedkar Nagar under sections 302/504 I.P.C. and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act.

¶8

The trial court after examining the evidence in detail and taking into consideration the submissions of the prosecution and defence found the charge under section 302 I.P.C. proved against the accused Jagat Raj Verma. However, learned trial court acquitted him for the offence under sections 504 I.P.C. and Sections 4/25 of the Arms Act The accused, Jagat Raj was sentenced life imprisonment under section 302 I.P.C.

¶9

The trial court however acquitted the accused, Bhagatraj and Ram Nayan for the offence under sections 302 & 504 I.P.C.

¶10

I have perused the impugned Judgment and order passed by the learned trial court in acquitting and sentencing the accused, Jagat Raj for the offence under section 302 I.P.C. and acquitting the accused Bhagat Raj and Ram Nayan for the offence under sections 302 & 504 I.P.C. I do not find that the trial court has committed any error of law, fact or evidence which requires interference by this court in exercise of its powers

¶11

under section 397 readwith 401 Cr.P.C.. Thus, there is no merit in this revision, which is hereby dismissed.

¶12

Order Date :- 18.5.2022

¶13

AKS

¶14

Digitally signed by ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.05.19 17:03:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sateesh Chandra Verma v. State of U.P.and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sateesh Chandra Verma v. State of U.P.and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Keshav Saroj @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohd. Fakrey @ Mohd. Khursheed Alam Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.and 3 Others

Sanjeet (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and 3 Others

Abhay Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru Home Secy. Lucknow

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow and 3 Ors.

Bindra Prasad Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.