Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Gopal Lal @ Gopilal – 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 petitioner challenging the judgment dated 29.05.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rajsamand (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') in Criminal Appeal No. 103/2011 by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 08.04.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kumbhalgarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Regular Case No. 247/2009, whereby, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the present petitioner as under:
| Offence under section 57 IPC | Two years' S.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months' S.I. |
| Offence under section 380 IPC | One year's S.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further two months' S.I. |
2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 09.10.2009, complainant Shyamlal Vaishnav submitted a written report before Police Station Kelwara to the effect that he is a 'Pujari' at Mateshwar Mahadev Temp
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 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 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 time already served when considering the circumstances of the case and the mental trauma endured during protracted trials.
The court may reduce a sentence based on the time already served and the overall circumstances of the case, while maintaining the conviction.
The court has the discretion to consider the time already served and the circumstances of the case in deciding the appropriate sentence for an offence.
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 can reduce the sentence to the period already served, considering the time spent in custody and the mental trauma of a protracted trial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioners while maintaining the amount of fine, considering ....
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
