Back
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Mamud Ali – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), Assam for the State.
2. The present revision petition under Section 397 read with Sections 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is filed challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the judgment and order dated 23.12.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Morigaon in connection with GR Case No. 1116/2008 arising out of Lahorighat P.S. Case No. 191/2008 convicting and sentencing the petitioners to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for 3 (three) months and also to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo Simple Imprisonment (SI) for another 10 (ten) days for the commission of offence under Sections 323/34 IPC. Further, the challenge is against the judgment and order dated 19.04.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon in Criminal Appeal No. 03/2012 upholding the judgment and order dated 23.12.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Morigaon.
3. The prosecution story in nutshell is that on 01.10.2008 at around 08:30 pm, during the distribution of
The court emphasized that sentencing should consider individual circumstances and not be mechanical, allowing probation for first-time offenders.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 during sentencing, highlighting the need for discretion based on the nature of the offence and the offender's b....
The court emphasized the importance of considering the offender's background and the nature of the offence when exercising discretion in sentencing under the Probation of Offenders Act.
The court emphasized the necessity of considering the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in sentencing, highlighting that sentencing should focus on reform rather than punishment.
The court emphasized the importance of considering probation for first-time offenders, prioritizing rehabilitation over punishment.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the rehabilitative purpose of sentencing under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, especially for first-time offenders.
The court emphasized the importance of discretion in sentencing, allowing probation for first-time offenders in non-heinous cases.
The court ruled that proper consideration under the Probation of Offenders Act is essential, especially for first-time offenders in non-heinous cases.
The court emphasized the rehabilitative purpose of the Probation of Offenders Act, asserting that first-time offenders should be considered for probation to promote reform rather than punishment.
The court emphasized the necessity of considering the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in sentencing, especially for first-time offenders, to promote rehabilitation over punishment.
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
