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

2023 Supreme(UK) 618

PANKAJ PUROHIT
Vijay Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Revisionist :Mr. Sachin, advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Kuldeep Singh Rawal, A.G.A.

JUDGMENT :

This Criminal Revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.05.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ranikhet, District –Almora in Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 2009 “Vijay Ram Vs. State of Uttaraskhand”, whereby, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ranikhet affirmed the judgment and order dated 25.03.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ranikhet in Criminal Case No. 820 of 2001 “State Vs. Vijay Ram”, whereby, the revisionist-accused was convicted under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A IPC and was sentenced Rs. 500/- as fine in each of the offence under Section 279, 337, 388 IPC and two years rigorous imprisonment under section 304-A IPC and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation that if the fine is not paid, will have to undergo 4 months additional simple imprisonment.

2. As per the case of the prosecution, a first information report was lodged against the revisionist-accused in Police Station–Ranikhet by informant Bharat Bhushan S/o Dol Singh (PW-1) with the allegations that the informant was the resident of Village–Sauni (Devlikhet); according to informant he boarded the bus no. U.P. 02B-7025 of KMOU for going to his village;

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