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

2022 Supreme(UK) 209

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Dharmendra – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. V.S. Rathour, adv

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

The challenge in this revision is made to the following:-

    “(i) Judgment and Order dated 31.07.2006, passed in Criminal Case No.1250 of 2004, State vs. Dharmendra, by the court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh, District Dehradun (for short, “the case”).

By it, the revisionist has been convicted under Section 279 IPC and sentenced to one month imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/-; under Section 338 IPC sentenced to two months imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/- and the revisionist has been convicted under Section 304-A IPC and sentenced to 06 months imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/-.

(ii) The judgment and order dated 22.12.2009, recorded in Criminal Appeal No.40 of 2006, Dharmendra vs. State, by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Rishikesh, District Dehradun. By it, the judgment and order dated 31.07.2006, passed in the case has been upheld.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Facts necessary to appreciate the controversy briefly stated are as follows. On 30.08.2004, deceased, a girl of 13 years of age was standing on the left side of a road at 10:30 in the morning when a vehicle bearing Registration No. U

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