Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J
Ladu Lal – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
ORDER :
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.)
Earlier on 28.08.2024 and 12.02.2025 no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Today even in the second round also, no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
2. Learned Public Prosecutor submits a report from which it is found that the petitioner is still alive. Report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor is taken on record.
3. Since on various occasion, no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner and the petitioner is still alive, therefore, it is in the interest of justice that learned counsel Mr. Pallav Sharma is hereby appointed as Amicus curiae in this case. He shall be paid his remuneration by the Legal Services Authority as per Legal Aid Scheme.
4. Heard on the revision petition.
5. By way of filing the instant criminal revision petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 05.08.2006 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Bhilwara, in Criminal Appeal No.40/2006 whereby the learned appellate Court while rejecting the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction dated 24.11.2005 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Bhilwara, in Criminal Regular Case No.85/2000 by which the lea
The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to time already served, emphasizing justice and leniency due to the petitioner's long-standing trial and personal circumstances.
The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to time served, considering the petitioner's socio-economic status and the duration of legal proceedings.
The court upheld the conviction for negligent driving but reduced the sentence based on the time served and the petitioner's societal status and financial hardship.
The court upheld the conviction for negligent driving but reduced the sentence to the time already served, considering the petitioner's age and circumstances.
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 affirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to the time already served, emphasizing the need for a just and reasonable sentence considering the petitioner's circumstances.
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 to the period already served, considering the duration of incarceration and the circumstances surrounding the case.
The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to the time already served, considering the petitioner's long trial and personal hardships.
The court established that while accountability for negligent driving resulting in injury and death is crucial, mitigating factors such as age, social status, and the duration of legal proceedings ca....
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
