Full Text
Translation output
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.276 OF 2000
Chandra Sekhar ...Appellant(s)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.276 OF 2000
Chandra Sekhar ...Appellant(s)
VERSUS
State of Andhra Pradesh ...Respondent(s)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The sole appellant was convicted by the Trial Court under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rupees two thousand; in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. On appeal being preferred, Sessions
Court upheld the conviction. Thereafter, when the matter was taken to the High
Court in revision, while upholding the conviction, the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the appellant has been reduced from two years to one and a half years. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the records, we are of the view that the High Court was quite justified in dismissing the revision application as there was no infirmity in the order passed by the Trial Court convicting the appellant and confirmed by the appellate court. ...2/-
- 2 -
The appeal, accordingly, fails and the same is dismissed.
The bail bonds of the appellant, who is on bail, are cancelled and he is directed to be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remaining period of sentence for which the matter shall be reported to this Court by the Trial Court within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. ......................J.
[B.N. AGRAWAL]
[G.S. SINGHVI]
[AFTAB ALAM]
New Delhi, October 22, 2008.
The sole appellant was convicted by the Trial Court under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rupees two thousand; in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. On appeal being preferred, Sessions
Court upheld the conviction. Thereafter, when the matter was taken to the High
Court in revision, while upholding the conviction, the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the appellant has been reduced from two years to one and a half years. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the records, we are of the view that the High Court was quite justified in dismissing the revision application as there was no infirmity in the order passed by the Trial Court convicting the appellant and confirmed by the appellate court. ...2/-
- 2 -
The appeal, accordingly, fails and the same is dismissed.
The bail bonds of the appellant, who is on bail, are cancelled and he is directed to be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remaining period of sentence for which the matter shall be reported to this Court by the Trial Court within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. ......................J.
[B.N. AGRAWAL]
[G.S. SINGHVI]
[AFTAB ALAM]
New Delhi, October 22, 2008.
JUDGMENT