Back
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Inder – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - In 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 Court, for the safety of all concerned.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the appeal of the appellant may kindly be allowed and the judgment dated 21.3.90 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Churu may kindly be quashed and the appellant may kindly be acquitted from the charges levelled against him."
3. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1986 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1990.
4. Mr. Vikas Bijarnia, appearing as Pro Bono, on behalf of the appellant, submits that this Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 21.03.1990, passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Churu in Sessions Case No. 58/96 whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5000/-, default of payment of which he was ordered to furthe
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 applied the principles of sentencing policy and the need for timely treatment of injuries in determining the appropriate sentence for the appellant.
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 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 applied sentencing principles of deterrence and correction, considering medical evidence and discrepancies in the prosecution's story to reduce the appellant's sentence.
The Court considered the nature of injuries, discrepancies in evidence, and the time elapsed in granting relief to the appellant.
The court applied the principles of deterrence and correction in sentencing the appellant under Section 376 IPC, considering the period already undergone by the appellant.
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.
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
