Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Balu Ram S/o Baldev – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appointment of amicus curiae in absence of petitioner (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. overview of charges, trial, and convictions (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments for leniency based on personal circumstances (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's analysis of sentence modification and justification (Para 11 , 13) |
| 5. final judgment and modification of sentencing (Para 12 , 14 , 15) |
ORDER :
1. Earlier on 08.01.2025, 22.01.2025, 05.02.2025 and 19.02.2025 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 numerous occasions, 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. Kuldeep 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 bee
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 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 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 upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence based on the petitioner's personal circumstances and time served, emphasizing the need for a just punishment.
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 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, considering the petitioner's circumstances and the lengthy trial duration.
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
