SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 1081

DEEPAK ROSHAN
Susen Mahto – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Vijay Shankar Jha, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mrs. Vandana Bharti, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been preferred by the petitioners for modification of the judgment and order dated 28.11.2019, passed in Cr. Revision No.600 of 2014, whereby petitioners were directed to be released under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act with condition that the petitioner shall file two sureties to the tune of Rs.25,000/-each coupled with personal bond to the effect that they shall not commit any offence and shall be of good behavior and shall maintain peace during the period of two years. It was further ordered that if there is breach of any condition, they will subject themselves to undergo sentence as directed by the learned trial court. The bond aforesaid be filed by the petitioner within three months from the date of the judgment. Further condition was that the petitioners shall also pay fine of Rs.3,000/-each before the Secretary, DLSA, Saraikella within a period of three months from the date of the judgment or the petitioner shall serve SI for 3 months for non-compliance of the order of fine.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to lockdown they could no

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top