Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Gendmal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
1. Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners challenging the judgment dated 12.12.2015 passed by learned Sessions Judge & Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') in Criminal Appeal No. 55/2013 by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioners and upheld the judgment dated 10.07.2012 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhariyawad (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Regular Criminal Case No. 119/2008, whereby, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the present petitioners as under:
| Offence under section 332 IPC | One year's S.I. and a fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo five days' S.I. |
| Offence under section 353 IPC | Six months' S.I. and a fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three days' S.I. |
2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 13.01.2008, complainant Ramesh Chandra submitted a written report before Police Station Parsola
The court can reduce the sentence to the period already served, considering the time spent in custody and the mental trauma of a protracted trial.
The court may reduce a sentence based on the time already served and the circumstances surrounding the case, even when the conviction is upheld.
The court may reduce a sentence to the period already served, considering the duration of incarceration and the circumstances surrounding the case.
The court has the discretion to consider the time already undergone and the mental agony of protracted trial in reducing the sentence of the accused.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 379 IPC but reduced the sentence to the period already served, considering the time spent in custody and the circumstances of the case.
The court may reduce a sentence to the time already served when considering the circumstances of the case and the mental trauma endured during protracted trials.
The court has the discretion to consider the time already spent by the accused-petitioner in incarceration and trial when deciding on the reduction of the sentence for the offences.
The court may reduce a sentence to the period already served, considering the time spent in incarceration and the circumstances of the case.
The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to the time already served, emphasizing justice must consider the accused's circumstances and hardships.
The court upheld the conviction for negligent driving but modified the sentence to the time already served, emphasizing justice and the petitioner's 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
