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

2021 Supreme(UK) 700

R.C.KHULBE
JAGDISH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Arya, Learned Counsel
For the State : Mr. Deepak Bisht, Learned Brief Holder

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble R.C. Khulbe, J.

Since the revision is time barred, accordingly, delay condonation application (IA/2/2021) has been moved. Notices were issued to the private respondent but despite personal service none appeared on behalf of him. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the application seeking condonation of delay. Accordingly, delay condonation application is allowed and delay in preferring the present revision is condoned.

2. Heard.

3. Admit.

4. This criminal revision, preferred by the revisionist u/s 397/ 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.09.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ramnagar, District Nainital in Criminal Case No.1385 of 2011, State Vs. Satnam Singh @ Sonu & Others, whereby the learned trial Court convicted the revisionist under Section 147 IPC and sentenced him to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.200/- with default stipulation and also convicted U/s 332 IPC and sentenced him to undergo one year's R.I. with a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation, as well as against the judgment and order dated 04.08.2017 p

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