Partly allowed

Baney Khan v. State

Rajasthan HC12 Apr 2014CRLR/84/1997

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition regarding conviction for cheating under IPC 420, the High Court of Rajasthan, Jodhpur granted the benefit of probation to the accused petitioner. The court required the petitioner to deposit a sum and execute bonds under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, with a warning that non-compliance would result in serving the remaining sentence.

What did the court decide?

Benefit of probation granted subject to deposit of Rs. 10,000 and execution of specific bonds; failure to comply requires serving remaining sentence.

Baney Khan Vs State — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2014)

¶1

S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.84/1997

¶2

1/4

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR.

¶4

¶5

JUDGMENT

¶6

BANEY KHAN V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN

¶7

S.B.Criminal Revision	Petition
No.84/1997 under section	397/401
CR.PC against the judgme	nt dated
24.01.1997 passed by the	Additional
Sessions Judge, Churu in	Criminal
Appeal No.12/1995.

¶8

¶9

DATE OF ORDER 12.04.2014

¶10

PRESENT

¶11

HON'BLE MR. ATUL KUMAR JAIN ,J

¶12

Mr.M.K.Garg for the petitioner Mr.JP Bhardwaj, PP for the State

¶13

BY THE COURT

¶14

The accused Baney Khan was convicted vide order dated 18.04.1994 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sardarshahar District Churu in Criminal Case No.123/1983 relating to F.I.R. No.34/1981 registered at Police Station, Sardarshahar under section 420 of Indian Penal Code. Criminal Appeal No.12/1995 of accusedpetitioner Baney Khan was decided by Additional

¶15

S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.84/1997

¶16

2/4

¶17

Sessions Judge, Churu on 24.01.1997 and the accusedpetitioner was ordered to suffer conviction and sentence as follows:-

¶18

420 IPC Six months SI with fine of of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo three months additional imprisonment.

¶19

In this Criminal Revision Petition, it has been argued on behalf of the accused-petitioner Baney Khan that out of six months imprisonment, he has already suffered two months imprisonment and so the accused-petitioner has not challenged his conviction awarded under section 420 IPC. It is prayed on his behalf that he should be let off on the ground of undergone sentence.

¶20

In the circumstances of the case, the learned Public Prosecutor has also not seriously opposed the prayer of the accused-petitioner.

¶21

I have heard both the parties and also gone through the record of the case. The matter relates to the offence

¶22

S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.84/1997

¶23

3/4

¶24

of cheating and allegedly an amount of Rs.40,000/- was obtained by the two accused persons. In this case, accused Major Khan has already expired so it can be said that about Rs.20,000/- were obtained by cheating by the accused-petitioner Baney Khan from different complainants in this case.

¶25

In the circumstances of the case and looking to the fact that the matter is about 34 years old, it is hereby ordered that accused-petitioner Baney Khan be given benefit of probation by the trial court provided he deposits an amount of Rs.10,000/- in the trial court on 20.05.2014 towards cost of proceedings and on the same day, he will have to submit two bail bonds of Rs.10,000/each and a personal bond of Rs.20,000/- for a period of three years under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the satisfaction of the trial court. In case, the accused-petitioner fails to comply with conditions mentioned in this order, he will have to suffer remaining part of sentence as ordered by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Churu on 24.01.1997. The

¶26

S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.84/1997

¶27

4/4

¶28

The record of the courts below along with a copy of this judgment be sent back within three days to the concerned courts. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶29

[ATUL KUMAR JAIN], J.

¶30

Anil Singh

Baney Khan v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baney Khan v. State

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

Udailal Vs Chairman R S R T C

Sahil Pemawat Vs State

Reshma Ram Vs C.B.I.

Laxman Vs State

Surender Kumar Vs State

Govind Prasad Vs State