Revision against conviction and sentence. Court upholds conviction but reduces jail term to time already served. Enhances fines for offences under Sections 451 and 354 IPC and keeps bail bond operative for six months.
Conviction upheld; jail sentence reduced to time served; fines enhanced to Rs.5000/-; bail bond extended for six months.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Criminal Revision No. 437 of 2005
Sanjivan S/o Dadu Mahar, Aged about 38 years, R/o Village Karvari, P.S. Dongargarh, Dist:- Rajnandgaon (C.G.).
----Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through the District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon (C.G.).
---- Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Sumit Jhanwar, PL
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel
Order on Board
21/06/2018
2
herself and told the applicant that she will intimate the incident to her mother and father, on which the applicant/accused fled away. After return of her mother and father, the complainant narrated the incident to both of them. On the basis of said report, offence under Sections 452 and 354 of IPC was registered. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the Trial Court. The learned ACJM has convicted the accused/applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 451 and 354 of IPC and sentenced him as mentioned in para 1 of this order, which was also affirmed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dated 06/09/2005. Thereafter, this revision has been preferred by the present applicant.
3
applicant has undergone about 1 month of jail sentence out of total jail sentence of 6 months.
Sd/-
(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge
Rahul
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the jail sentence of 6 months awarded to the applicant under Sections 451 and 354 of IPC should be enhanced to time served due to long pendency and lack of antecedents.
Whether the fine imposed for the same offence should be enhanced in light of the delay and the enhancement provision under Section 372 of IPC.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Sanjivan S/o Dadu Mahar
State of Chhattisgarh through the District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon
Arvind Singh Chandel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
