The court partly allowed the appeal against conviction under Section 304-A IPC. While maintaining the conviction, it reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant based on precedents regarding ends of justice.
Sentence reduced to the period already undergone; bail bonds discharged.
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.
(1 of 3)
[CRLA-303/1992]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 303/1992
Pummi @ Pemina Ram
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. SL Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
06/07/2022
“It is, therefore, prayed that appeal of the Appellant be allowed and judgment dated 29.07.92 passed in Sessions Case No.16/92 convicting the appellant under Section 304(A) I.P.C. be quashed and set aside and the appellant will be acquitted and discharge. ”
1991 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1992.
(2 of 3)
[CRLA-303/1992]
in default of payment of which he was ordered to further undergo one months’ S.I.
Alister Anthony Pareira (Supra)
“ There is no straitjacket formula for sentencing an accused on proof of crime. The courts have evolved certain principles: twin objective of the sentencing policy is deterrence and correction. What sentence would meet the ends of justice depends on the facts and circumstances of each case and the court must keep in mind the gravity of the crime, motive for the crime, nature of the offence and all other attendant circumstances. ”
Haripada Das (Supra)
“…considering the fact that the respondent had already undergone detention for some period and the case is pending for a pretty long time for which he had suffered both financial hardship and mental agony and also considering the fact that he had been released on bail as far back as on 17-1-1986, we feel that the ends of justice will be met in the facts of the case if the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone…”
(3 of 3)
[CRLA-303/1992]
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
56-Sudheer/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the sentence awarded to the appellant can be reduced to the period already undergone without interfering with the conviction.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Alister Anthony Pareira Vs. State of MaharashtraRelied on¶26
Alister Anthony Pareira Vs. State of Maharashtra (2012) 2 SCC 648 · Who else cites this
Haripada Das Vs. State of W.B.Relied on¶28
Haripada Das Vs. State of W.B. (1998) 9 SCC 678 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pummi @ Pemina Ram
State
Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
