High Court affirmed conviction and sentence imposed for offenses under Sections 324, 323, and 341 IPC but ordered reduction of sentence to time served and directed payment of Rs. 20,000 each as compensation.
Sentence reduced to time undergone; payment of Rs. 20,000 each by way of compensation to two injured.
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. 214 of 2016
Arising out of P.S. Case No. -100 Year- 2000 Thana -Itarhi District- BUXAR ======================================================== 1. Jag Lal Upadhayay Son of late Raj Narayan Upadhyay. 2. Rabi Shankar Upadhayay.
======================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash, Adv. For the Respondent/s: Mr. APP.
======================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 05-04-2016
The Petitioners seek revision of the judgment of conviction dated 20.01.2016 passed by the Sessions Judge, Buxar in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2011, by which he has affirmed the judgment dated 20.05.2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Buxar in Itarhi P.S. Case No. 100 of 2000 (Tr. No. 1683 of 2009, G.R. No. 1442 of 2000), by which he has convicted the Petitioners under Sections 324, 323 and 341 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for two years.
Having gone through the judgment of conviction, I do not find any reason for interference.
However, considering the period of custody the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.214 of 2016 dt.05-04-2016
2
Petitioners and payment of Rs. 20,000/- each by way of compensation to the two injured to be distributed equally.
With the aforesaid observations, the application
stands dismissed.
(Anjana Prakash, J.)
Vikash/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the judgment convicting the Petitioners under Sections 324, 323 and 341 IPC calling for revision should be interfered.
Whether and how the sentence should be reduced considering the period of custody undergone by the Petitioners.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jag Lal Upadhayay and others
The State of Bihar
Anjana Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
