Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD, J
Shiv Shankar Maraiya – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(SANJAY PRASAD, J.)
I.A No. 2753 of 2024
I.A No. 2753 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for condoning the delay of 491 days in filing this instant Criminal Revision Application.
2. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and in view of the averments made in Paragraph nos. 3 to 7 of the I.A. No. 2753 of 2024 and the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 22.08.2023, the delay of 491 days in filing this instant Criminal Revision Application is hereby condoned.
3. Thus, I.A. No. 2753 of 2024 is allowed and stand disposed of.
4. The present Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 10.06.2022 passed by Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Dumka by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.07.2017 passed by learned S.D.J.M, Dumka in connection with Shikaripara P.S. Case No. 19 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 151 of 2016 in T.R. Case No. 1673/2017 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code and sente
The court condoned the delay in filing a Criminal Revision Application and granted bail to the petitioner, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent further criminal conduct.
The court condoned a significant delay in filing a revision application and granted bail based on the petitioner's lengthy custody and the circumstances of the case.
A court may grant bail considering the duration of custody, despite serious charges, when supported by comparable cases.
The court condoned a 588-day delay in filing a Criminal Revision under the Limitation Act due to the petitioner's custody and financial constraints, emphasizing leniency in such circumstances.
Court considerations for bail include the duration of custody and the gravity of allegations, emphasizing that prolonged detention can warrant bail even in serious cases.
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, emphasizing the necessity of compensation and the legal obligation of cheque issuance.
Negligence under Indian Penal Code sections 279 and 304A requires evidence of recklessness leading to fatal consequences, with affirmed convictions supporting the effectiveness of judicial decisions.
The court condoned a 212-day delay in filing a Criminal Revision Application based on the petitioner's financial hardship and ignorance of prior judgments, granting provisional bail during the appeal....
The court granted bail during a pending criminal revision considering the petitioner's custody duration while imposing conditions to prevent future offenses.
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
