Uttarakhand HC Allows Revision of Case on the Basis of Quantum of Sentence

Must Read

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated...

Delhi High Court Directs Delhi Jal Board To Make Supply of Potable Drinking Water

The High Court of Delhi in the matter of Delhi Sainik Cooperation Housing Ltd. v. Union of India &...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Security To BJP Leader Alleged for Not Supporting Farmers Protest

The Order had come in the form of a Writ Petition filed by Tikshan Sood under Article 226 of...

Lahore High Court Outlaws Two-Finger Virginity Test

The Lahore High Court in Pakistan has outlawed the use and conduct of virginity tests, namely, the use of...

Follow us

A Single Judge Bench of Hon’ble Justice N.S. Dhanik, heard the case of Mahboob v. State of Uttarakhand via video conferencing.

A criminal revision was preferred against the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar/2nd FTC Haridwar District Haridwar, where the revisionist was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 411 IPC (Dishonestly receiving stolen property) and was sentenced to undergo six months imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 3,000/-.

Facts of the case

An FIR was lodged by the informant alleging that on 14.01.2003, individuals of the Intelligence Department namely Devendra Singh, Surendra Kumar, Madanlal and Shiv Om Sharma were sitting at Material Gate, Watch Tower-5. At about 4 A.M. to 6 A.M., three persons were seen at the Railway Line along with some goods, and the moment they ran to catch them, they threw the said goods in the bushes and started running from there. 

During this incident, an individual namely Mahboob, the revisionist, fell on a stone and when he sustained injuries, the above-mentioned officers of the Intelligence Department caught him. The other co-accused fled away from the spot. Along with the revisionist, the officers searched the location wherein they retrieved the goods, which were thrown in the bushes. The said goods were weighed and its weight came to 152 Kg.

Contentions of the Revisionist

Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted his arguments only on the quantum of sentence, and did not press the revision on merits. 

Learned counsel for the revisionist further submitted that the revisionist was a poor person and he was the sole bread earner of his family. On instructions, he submitted that the revisionist had already served around two and a half months in jail and prayed that the substantive sentence awarded to the revisionist may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

Contentions of the State

Learned State Counsel submitted that there was no illegality in the impugned judgment of the Trial Court and the same had also been affirmed by the First Appellate Court. It was further submitted that there was neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the revisionist nor any sympathy called for in the case.

Court’s Observations

The Court opined that since the revisionist had already served around two and a half months imprisonment, that much of sentence as served by the revisionist, was sufficient to serve the purpose.  Further, the Court, considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the revisionist was a poor person, the ends of justice would be subserved if the jail sentence of the revisionist was reduced to the period already undergone by him. 

Court’s Decision

The Court dismissed the revision on merits. However, it was partly allowed on the quantum of sentence and the sentence was reduced to the period already undergone by the revisionist. 

The fine was enhanced from 3,000/- to Rs. 10,000/-. The already deposited fine would be adjusted in the enhanced amount of fine, as directed by the Court. If the revisionist failed to deposit the enhanced amount within two months from the date of the judgement, he will have to serve six months additional imprisonment.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum of compensation have not yet...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated 28.10.2020 disqualified the petitioner and...

Delhi High Court Directs Delhi Jal Board To Make Supply of Potable Drinking Water

The High Court of Delhi in the matter of Delhi Sainik Cooperation Housing Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors held that right to...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Security To BJP Leader Alleged for Not Supporting Farmers Protest

The Order had come in the form of a Writ Petition filed by Tikshan Sood under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition before...

Lahore High Court Outlaws Two-Finger Virginity Test

The Lahore High Court in Pakistan has outlawed the use and conduct of virginity tests, namely, the use of the “two-finger” virginity test and...

London Court Rejects Assange’s Extradition – What Happens Now? 

Earlier last week, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, sitting in the Westminster Magistrates’ Court denied the Government of the U.S.A.'s request to the U.K. to...

Calcutta High Court Decides in Favor of Contractor as He Accidentally Pays an Excessively High Amount

Introduction The present writ petition has been filed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to revoke the Petitioner’s offer as...

Petition Filed in Delhi High Court Challenging the New Privacy Policy of WhatsApp

A petition has been raised before the Delhi High Court challenging the updated privacy policy of the instant messaging app, WhatsApp. It is accused of looking into the virtual activities of the users,

Bombay High Court Says Pleas Against the Rejection of Nomination Before the Polls Is Not Maintainable

Bombay High Court on Wednesday held that a candidate cannot challenge his nomination by filing a writ petition before a court prior to the polls after his nominations have already been rejected by the Returning Officer (RO) for the Panchayat elections of January 15.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -