HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J
Ram Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. fine amount maintained (Para 13) |
Judgment :
1. By way of filing the instant criminal revision petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 15.07.2003 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No.3, Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No.34/2003 whereby the learned appellate Court partly allowed the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction dated 17.11.2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Pipar Shahar in Criminal Case No.265/1996 whereby learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the petitioner as under:-
| Offence | Sentence | Fine | Sentence in default of fine |
| Section 279 IPC | 1 month’s S.I. | Rs.100/- | 7 days’ S.I. |
| Section 304A IPC | 1 year’s R.I. | Rs.5,000/- | 1 month’s R.I. |
| Section 337 IPC | 1 month’s S.I. | Rs.100/- | 7 days’ S.I. |
2. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the period spent in judicial custody shall be adjusted in the original imprisonment.
3. The gist of the prosecution story is that on 10.05.1996, complainant Amraram submitted a written report at Police Station Pipar Shahar to the extent that at about 12:30 PM he reached near Nanan Road and at that time, Bhagirath riding a moped along with Bhagaram were coming towards Pipa
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 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 upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to the time already served, considering the petitioner's age and circumstances.
The court affirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to reflect the time served, considering the petitioner's personal circumstances and hardships.
The court established that while the conviction for negligent driving resulting in death and injury was warranted, sentencing should consider the individual circumstances of the offender, including a....
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 established that in cases of negligence leading to death, the sentence can be adjusted based on the defendant's personal circumstances and the duration of the legal proceedings.
The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to time served, emphasizing justice and the petitioner's circumstances.
The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence to the time already served, emphasizing justice and the petitioner's age and circumstances.
Court upheld conviction for reckless driving but modified sentence based on humanitarian grounds considering age and time served.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.