Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
Unni Pichibabu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. handling of first-time offenders under gaming law. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding sentencing. (Para 5) |
| 3. observations on sentencing based on offender's record. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. final decision reflecting on proportionality in sentencing. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. final decision regarding sentence modification. (Para 11) |
19.06.2025 brevity ‘the Act./) and sentencing him to suffer simple imprisonment for one month along with the other accused (A1 and A3).
2. Sri P.Nagendra Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court imposed sentence without resorting to impose fine , as the Petitioner was indulged in commission of the offence at first time. The Petitioner admitted guilty before the learned Trial Court on the suggestion given by the Court constable concerned that if he pleads guilty he would be sentenced to fine only.
3. It is further submitted that there were no adverse antecedents against the P(=>titinnor onW :
-position of sentence of one month i imprisonment is highly disproportionate and unwarranted. A sentence of fine of Rs.300/- would have met the ends ofjustice and urged to dispose of the Revision Case.
4- -Ms. P.Akhila, le
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
