Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
JITENDRA KUMAR
Kaku Sood @ Kukku Sood @ Cuckoo Sood @ Coocko Sood, son of late Badri Nath Sood – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of case background and initial acquittal (Para 1) |
| 2. factual background of criminal case. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court's analysis and observations. (Para 4 , 10) |
| 4. arguments on maintainability of the revision. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. conclusion permitting filing of a criminal appeal. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT :
JITENDRA KUMAR, J.
The present Cr. Revision petition has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 13.12.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Purena, in Cr. Revision No. 473 of 2013, CIS No. 647 of 2013 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has set aside the judgment dated 31.7.2013 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Purnea, Shri Ajay Kumar, in G.R. Case No. 1477 of 1997 arising out of K. Hat P.S. Case No. 300 of 1997 whereby the petitioner was acquitted.
2. The factual background of this case is that on the complaint of Santosh Kumar Singh under Section 156(3) Cr.PC before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, F.I.R. was directed to be lodged against the petitioner and consequently, K. Hat P.S. Case No. 300 of 1997 was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420 , 406 and 409 of the INDIAN
A Criminal Revision cannot be maintained against an acquittal, and an aggrieved party must file an appeal as per relevant statutes.
The court's decision was based on the proper appreciation of the evidence/material available in the record, the legality of the order taking cognizance, and the power of the revisional court under Se....
The court emphasized that a defective criminal revision cannot be treated as regular without adjudicating the application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
The court may modify sentences based on the nature of the offence and victim's willingness for leniency, as per Sections 357(3) and 357(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The High Court's revisional jurisdiction is limited and not to be exercised lightly; it will not intervene unless clear errors in the law or significant injustices are evident.
The High Court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked to prevent abuse of process and ensure justice, emphasizing the need for substantial justification in criminal proceedings.
The court upheld the modification of conviction from Section 326 to Section 324 based on procedural irregularities and mental anguish caused by prolonged litigation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
