Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
FARJAND ALI
Mahaveer Singh S/o Amar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of appeals arising from trial court judgment (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. procedural notes and final orders regarding appeals (Para 3 , 7 , 11) |
| 3. details of the incident and injuries sustained by victim (Para 4) |
| 4. arguments regarding the validity of witness testimonies (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. court's assessment of evidence and conviction justification (Para 8) |
| 6. modification of sentence based on case duration and context (Para 9) |
| 7. court's decision on the state's appeal against acquittal (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT :
FARJAND ALI, J.
1. These two appeals arise out of the same judgment dated 04.08.1993 passed by the learend Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions Case No.3/1990, whereby accused Pooran Singh, Jaswant Singh, Balveer Singh, Shambhoo Singh, Mahaveer Singh and Bhanwar Singh have been acquitted from the charges under Sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the IPC , however, accused Mahaveer Singh, Balveer Singh and Shambhoo singh have been convicted for the offence under Section 324 of the and each of them has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine, they would have to undergo simploe imp
The conviction for assault under Section 324 IPC was upheld due to sufficient evidence, while acquittal of others was justified as evidence showed no intent to kill.
The conviction under Section 324 IPC was affirmed, but the sentence was reduced to the time already served, acknowledging the appellant's age and absence of prior offenses.
Murder and rioting – Sans unlawful assembly case of each accused has to be considered according to his individual act.
The aim of Section 360 Cr.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of Probation of Offenders Act is to prevent offenders from being committed to jail, serving the dual purpose of deterrence and reformation.
For conviction under Section 34 IPC, there must be evidence of common intention and active participation; mere presence is insufficient.
The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless it finds a clear error or illegality in the trial court's judgment.
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
