Sukumar Singh And Ors. v. State of Jharkhand
Case brief
What is this about?
In a criminal revision, the High Court confirmed the conviction upheld by the appellate court as it lacked scope for interference. Regarding the sentence, the Court held no order was needed since the petitioners had already completed the term and were discharged from bail.
What did the court decide?
Conviction confirmed; no order on sentence as petitioners discharged after serving term.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 733 of 2002
- Sukumar Singh @ Suku Singh
- Raju Kumar Singh @ Rajkumar Singh
- Anil Singh
- Alok Kumar Singh
….. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ….. Opposite Party
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P
12/Dated: 21/11/2019
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners have already undergone the period of sentence of one month, passed by the learned trial court under Sections 323 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code and this statement is already made in paragraph no.2 of supplementary affidavit filed on 13.05.2003. He further submits that in view of the aforesaid fact, nothing remains in this case.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere in a criminal revision when the petitioners have already completed the sentence imposed by the trial court.
Whether the conviction confirmed by the appellate court requires scrutiny in view of the petitioners' independent representation of false implication.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Sukumar Singh
- petitioner
Raju Kumar Singh
- petitioner
Anil Singh
- petitioner
Alok Kumar Singh
- respondent
State of Jharkhand
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Jharkhand HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- Cr.Rev./733/2002
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court