Kuldeep Singh v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
Revision against conviction and sentence under the Arms Act. Court affirmed conviction but discharged the petitioner, holding time served was sufficient.
What did the court decide?
Revision petition allowed in part; conviction affirmed but petitioner discharged as time served was sufficient; remaining sentence set aside.
What the court decided
[2024:RJ-JD:12107]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 94/2004
Kuldeep Singh S/o Sh. Surendra Singh (Jogendra Singh) B/c Majbisikh R/o Santpura PS Sangaria District Haunmangarh
----Petitioner
| Versus |
|---|
State Of Rajasthan
| ----Respondent | |
|---|---|
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Vinod Bhadu |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Abhishek Purohit,AGA |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
DATEOF ORDER ::: 06/03/2024 BY THE COURT:-
- By way of filing the instant Revision Petition, challenge is made to the order dated 19.01.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangariya, District Hanumangarh in Criminal Appeal No.1/2004 whereby the learned Judge affirmed the order dated 14.10.2003 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangariya, District Hanumangarh in Criminal Case No.490/1994, whereby the learned trial Judge convicted the petitioner Kuldeep Singh for the offence under Section 25 (1B)A of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo one year’s simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default to further undergo one year’s simple imprisonment.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction of the petitioner for possession of a pistol and cartridge under the Arms Act is free from illegality.
Whether the sentence imposed on the petitioner, considering the time elapsed and lack of antecedents, requires modification.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Kuldeep Singh
- respondent
State Of Rajasthan
Coram
Farjand Ali
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Rajasthan HC
- Decided on
- · March
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLR/94/2004
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court