The High Court dismissed the criminal revision as infructuous since the accused had successfully appealed and the appellate judgment remained unchallenged, rendering the revision obsolete.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Revision No.42 of 2004 Date of Decision 24.09.2010
Bir Singh
...... Petitioner
VERSUS
Amarjit Singh and others
...... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL
Present: Mr.S.C.Pathela, Advocate, for the petitioner.
None for the respondents. *****
A.N.JINDAL, J:
Challenge in this petition is to the judgment dated 12.12.2002, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala, acquitting Daljit Singh, Mohinder Kaur and Jagdev Singh respondents-accused and convicting and sentencing respondent-accused Amarjit Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 498-A IPC. However, he was acquitted of the charge under Section 406 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has not denied that Amarjit Singh-respondent had challenged the impugned judgment in appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala and vide judgment dated 13.10.2004 (Annexure A-1), he has been acquitted.
In view of the fact that since the judgment passed in appeal has not been challenged by way of revision, therefore, this petition has become infructuous.
In view of aforesaid, this petition having become infructuous is
dismissed.
(A.N.Jindal) Judge
24.09.2010 mamta-II
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
