Back
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Gyan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - In the wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety of all concerned.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the criminal appeal may kindly be allowed and the appellants may be acquitted of the charges levelled against them or in the alternative they ma be given benefit of probation of offenders Act."
3. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1991 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1993.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 26.06.1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar in Sessions Case 27/1991 whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 307, 307/34 of IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act as under:-
| Accused Appellant | Conviction | |
The court's decision was influenced by the sentencing principles, considering the crucial witness turning hostile and the non-recovery of the weapon of the crime, leading to the reduction of the appe....
The court applied the principles of sentencing policy and the need for timely treatment of injuries in determining the appropriate sentence for the appellant.
The court has the discretion to consider the time already spent in custody and may reduce the sentence accordingly.
The Court considered the nature of injuries, discrepancies in evidence, and the time elapsed in granting relief to the appellant.
The court must consider the gravity of the crime, motive for the crime, nature of the offence, and all other attendant circumstances in determining the appropriate sentence.
The court considered the gravity of the crime, motive for the crime, nature of the offence, and all other attendant circumstances in determining the appropriate sentence for the appellants.
The key legal point established in the judgment is the court's consideration of the proviso of Section 376 IPC for reducing the sentence based on adequate and special reasons.
The court considered the lack of medical evidence and shaky eyewitness testimony in allowing the appellant's prayer to substitute the sentence awarded with the period already undergone.
The court must consider the principles of deterrence and correction in sentencing, as well as the gravity of the crime, motive for the crime, and all other attendant circumstances.
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
