RAVINDER SINGH CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Ravinder Singh Chaudhary
State of Uttarakhand and another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Accused Soni Verma was put to trial in connection with charge under Sections 420, 406, 506 of IPC. PW-1 Ravinder and PW-2 Lakhbir Singh were examined on behalf of prosecution. After recording the evidence of PW-1 and PW-2, accused moved an application for confessing his guilt. When he moved the application for confession, prosecution evidence was closed. Statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was taken, in which he confessed his guilt. Accused also stated that PW-1 and PW-2 spoke truth. No evidence was adduced in defence. After considering the testimony of PW-1 and PW-2 coupled with documentary evidence, which was brought on record, accused was convicted of the charges levelled against him by learned Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar, vide judgment and order dated 03.07.2008. While convicting the accused under Sections 420, 406, 506 of IPC, accused was awarded rigorous imprisonment for 14 months (one year and two months), which period he had already undergone in jail, alongwith a fine of Rs. 200/-.
(2.) Whereas the convict did not prefer criminal appeal against impugned judgment and order dated 03.07.2008, present criminal revision was filed by the complainant (revisionist herein) for enhancement of sentence awarded to the convict. In other words, criminal revision was filed on the ground of inadequacy of sentence.
(3.) The question is whether the sentence awarded to the convict (respondent no. 2 herein) was sufficient or inadequate;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.