The court dismissed the criminal revision as having become infructuous. It held that the petitioner has already served the full sentence and completed the term of imprisonment, making further proceedings unnecessary unless he is wanted in other cases.
Petitioner directed to be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case(s).
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 1817 of 2017
Biglal Oraon …… Petitioner
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Sanjay Oraon …… Opp. Parties
-------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Shweta Singh, APP -------
15/Dated: 04th August, 2023
This Criminal Revision has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 18.11.2017 passed in Criminal Appeal No.72 of 2017 by the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.04.2017 passed by Smt. Kumari Nitika, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ranchi by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced to undergo S.I for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- along with the cheque amount of Rs.8,20,000/- in connection with Complaint Case No.566 of 2014 and in default of payment of fine, the petitioner has been ordered to further undergo S.I for one month.
-2-
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Saket/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal revision deserves to be decided when the petitioner has already completed the sentence.
Biglal Oraon
The State of Jharkhand
Sanjay Oraon
Sanjay Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
