Anil Zindal v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a criminal revision petition because the petitioner had served the entire sentence, and the impugned conviction was based on cogent evidence requiring no revisional interference.
What the court decided
[2023/RJJD/017527]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 999/2018
Anil Zindal, S/o Panna Lal Jindal, R/o Devkripa, 09 Verma Colony, Sector No.9 Savina (Central Jail Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Upadhyay For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.R. Choudhary, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
25/05/2023
- Pursuant to the judgment of conviction dated 17.09.2013, which was further affirmed by the learned appellate court vide judgment dated 22.07.2016, whereby he was directed to suffer sentence of six months with default clauses. Now he has served the entire sentence.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the conviction sustaining cogent and plausible evidence requiring no interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Anil Zindal
- respondent
State
Coram
Farjand Ali
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Rajasthan HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLR/999/2018
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court