Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
V.NARASINGH
Jalanidhi Lima – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V.Narasingh, J.
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
1. This Criminal Revision has been filed assailing the judgment dated 17.01.2004 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhawanipatna in Criminal Appeal No. 33/16 of 1998–2003, affirming the judgment of conviction qua the Petitioner dated 21.07.1998 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhawanipatna in Sessions Case No. 50/20 of 1997 (arising out of G.R. Case No. 27 of 1996 corresponding to T.R. No. 841 of 1996 of the Court of J.M.F.C., Madanpur, Rampur). By the said judgment, the learned Trial Court acquitted the co-accused but found Petitioner No. 1, Jalanidhi Lima, guilty of the offences under Sections 452 , 324 and 366 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code, and Petitioner No. 2, Banchanidhi Lima, guilty of the offences under and 366 read with of the Indian Penal Code, while acquitting him of the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code.
Accordingly, Petitioner No. 1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifte
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's conviction, emphasizing limited scrutiny of evidential assessments, and extended probation based on the Petitioners' ages and lack of subsequent offense....
The Court held that it was appropriate to grant probation to the convicted individuals based on their long-standing conduct and the nature of the offenses under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
The court upheld the trial court's convictions for outraging modesty and arson, confirming that decisions on evidence were sound and legal.
Released on admonition - Conviction modified - Trial court convicted accused for offence under Ss. 323, 341 and 379 of IPC and released other convicts, except present petitioners, under Act, 1958 on ....
Probation may be granted under the Probation of Offenders Act considering age and lack of criminal history despite prior convictions for violent offenses.
Revisional courts should only interfere with lower court judgments in cases of clear perversity; otherwise, decisions regarding evidence are upheld.
Conviction under Section 394 IPC must be supported by reliable identification evidence; lack thereof in this case rendered the conviction unsafe.
Convicted individuals may be granted probation under the Probation of Offenders Act based on age, societal integration, and absence of further criminal activity.
The court affirmed conviction under IPC for attempted modesty outrage and house trespass, allowing probation benefits based on the offender's age and significant delay post-offence.
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
