Revision filed against the conviction and three-year sentence under Section 420 IPC. The Single Judge found no justification for setting aside the conviction but reduced the sentence to the period already undergone after nearly eight years.
Sentence reduced to the period already undergone; remainder of the criminal revision dismissed.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Revision No. 210 of 2015
Arising out of P.S. Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- WESTCHAMPARAN (BETTIAH)
======================================================== Sambhu Parit Son of Ram Chandra Parit, Resident of villageMalkawli, P.S. Bagaha, District- West Champaran.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhitabh Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s: Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP.
======================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 13-08-2015
The Petitioner seeks revision of the judgment of conviction dated 27.06.2014 passed by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-III, Bagaha, West Champaran at Bettiah in Criminal Appeal No. 45(C) of 2000, by which he has affirmed the judgment dated 26.06.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bagaha in Complaint Case No. 435(C) of 1996 (Tr. No. 1112 of 2000), by which he has convicted the Petitioner under Section 420 IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for three years.
Having gone through the judgment of conviction, I do not find any justification for interference in the same.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.210 of 2015 dt.13-08-2015
2
However, considering that the Petitioner has
remained in custody for about eight months, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
With the aforesaid modification in sentence, the application stands dismissed.
Vikash/-
U T
(Anjana Prakash, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the conviction under Section 420 IPC
Whether the prison sentence should be reduced considering the time already spent in custody
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sambhu Parit
The State of Bihar
Bidya Devi @ Budha Devi
Anjana Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
