IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Lekh Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 20.12.2010, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (learned Appellate Court), vide which the appeal filed by the petitioners (accused before learned Trial Court) was partly allowed, the judgment passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Mandi (learned Trial Court) convicting the accused was upheld and affirmed but the sentence part of the judgment was set aside and the case was remanded to the learned Trial Court to pass appropriate order of sentence after hearing the parties. (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the police presented a challan against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 , 341 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code ( IPC ). The learned Trial Court framed the charges, recorded the evidence and convicted the accused of the commission of offences punishable under Sec
An appellate court cannot confirm a conviction and remand solely for sentencing; it must decide the appeal as a whole, including the question of probation.
The appellate court erred by remitting the matter for probation instead of granting it directly, as it had the jurisdiction to do so under the law.
First-time offenders should be considered for probation during sentencing, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.
The judgment emphasizes the narrow revisional jurisdiction of the High Courts while examining an order of acquittal and the requirement for recording special reasons for not extending the benefit of ....
The court emphasized that sentences imposed on guilty pleas should consider reformative justice, prioritizing leniency unless serious prior conduct is evidenced.
The appellate court exceeded its jurisdiction by setting aside a lawful conviction and a probation order without statutory justification, leading to manifest prejudice against the accused.
The appellate court cannot enhance a convict's sentence when the appeal is filed by the convict and no appeal for enhancement has been filed by the state or victim, violating rights under natural jus....
A court cannot review its own judgment once signed, except to correct clerical errors, and inherent powers to recall judgments are limited to jurisdictional errors or violations of natural justice.
Revision under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. not maintainable against the revisionary order of the Sessions Judge - No grounds for exercise of inherent power by this Court unde....
The High Court's revisional jurisdiction is limited and not to be exercised lightly; it will not intervene unless clear errors in the law or significant injustices are evident.
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.