Uttarakhand High Court
DSPLA/30/2004 of STATE Vs PRATIK on 28 December 2007
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Leave to Appeal Application No.30 of 2004 State of Uttaranchal ……………Applicant Versus Pratik S/o Gopal R/o Ghat Road, P.S. Rishikesh, Distt. Dehradun ………….Respondent Dated: December 28, 2007
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Special Leave to Appeal Application No.30 of 2004
State of Uttaranchal
……………Applicant
Versus
Pratik S/o Gopal R/o Ghat Road, P.S. Rishikesh, Distt. Dehradun ………….Respondent Dated: December 28, 2007
Sri M.A. Khan, learned brief holder for the State HON. DHARAM VEER, J.
This criminal appeal, preferred u/s 377 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.09.2004 passed by Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 149 of 2002, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the respondent under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.) and sentenced him for six months years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, 15 days imprisonment was awarded.
The present appeal has been preferred by the State for the enhancement of sentence as awarded by the trial court. I have perused the judgment and order dated 15.9.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dehradun. The learned Sessions Judge heard the respondent/accused on the point of sentence and the learned Sessions Judge after considering the fact that the respondent was a poor person and was a school going student, awarded sentence of six months R.I. and fine Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, 15 days further imprisonment.
After considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and particularly considering the fact that the respondent/accused was a poor boy and was a school going student and there was only one injury to the injured, the Court is of the view that it is not a fit case where the sentence awarded to the respondent/accused may be enhanced. The sentence as awarded by the trial court to the respondent/accused on the basis of facts and circumstances discussed above is just and proper and there is no need to interfere with the said judgment and order passed by the trial court for the above-said reasons and grounds.
For the reasons recorded above, the leave to appeal application and appeal, both are dismissed accordingly.
Rajeev Dang
(Dharam Veer, J.)