Partly allowed

Chamari Miya @ Gulam Noor Miya v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC14 Feb 2017CR. REV./1102/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the condonation of delay and reduced the petitioner's sentence to the period he had already undergone in custody for offences under Sections 498A and 323 IPC, without interfering with the conviction.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to the period during which the petitioner had already remained in custody in connection with the underlying cases.

Chamari Miya @ Gulam Noor Miya Vs The State Of Bihar — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1102 of 2016

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Chamari Miya @ Gulam Noor Miya, Son of Marhum Piru Miya, Resident of Village-Fuleldih, P. S. Imamganj, DistrictGaya

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

.... .... Respondent/s

¶8

===================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Iftekhar Mahmood

¶9

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 14-02-2017 I.A. No. 2109 of 2016 has been filed for condonation of delay in filing of the present revision application.

¶12

For the reasons stated in the said application, the same is allowed. The delay in filing of the application is condoned.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

The petitioner stands convicted of an offence punishable under Sections 498A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and six months for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code by an order date 12.04.2006 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati . His appeal against the said judgment and order has been dismissed by learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya by his judgment and order dated 02.05.2015 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2014/203 of

¶15

¶16

The present criminal revision application has been preferred against the aforesaid two orders.

¶17

In view of there being concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Courts below, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this Court may, without interfering with the findings of conviction, reduce the sentence awarded by the trial Court and affirmed by the appellate Court. He has drawn my attention to an order of this Court dated 24.06.2016 passed in Cr. Revision No. 91 of 2016, whereby in case of husband and mother-in-law of the victim, this Court has directed for reducing the sentence to the period already undergone by them in custody. Petitioner is in custody since 09.08.2016.

¶18

Considering the above submission, without interfering with the conviction of the petitioner, sentence is reduced to the period during which the petitioner has already remained in custody in connection with G.R. No. 677 of 1998/Tr. No. 264 of 2006.

¶19

Judgments and orders passed by the Courts below stand modified accordingly.

¶20

This application is thus, disposed of.

¶21

Arun Kumar (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) U

Chamari Miya @ Gulam Noor Miya v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chamari Miya @ Gulam Noor Miya v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramashish Mahto Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Hari Lal Paswan Vs Indu Devi

Md. Aslam @ Kallu Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dheeraj Kumar @ Shivam @ Abhishek Raj Vs The State Of Bihar

Mritunjay Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Firoj Alam Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.