CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(1999) 12 PAT CK 0041

Deo Nath Rai @ Deonath Ahir and Others vs State and Another

Patna High Court · Decided on 7 December 1999 · Citation: (2000) 1 BLJR 734

HON’BLE JUDGES
D.P.S. Choudhary, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 502 of 1995

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 336 words

D.P.S. Choudhary, J.—This application in Revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 18-9-95 passed by 5th Addl. Sessions Judge. Chapra (Saran) in Cr. Appeal No. 147 of 1988 confirming the judgment and order dated 10-8-88 passed by Ist Asstt. Sessions Judge Saran at Chapra in Sessions trial No. 1Q2/82/33/85 convicting the appellants under Sections 324 and 148, I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for two years each.

2.

The brief fact of the case is that P W. 5 lodged First Information Report on 7-9-75 before the Chapra Town Police station alleging therein that at about 11 a.m. there was altercation between the wife of Subedar Ahir and the accused-persons including the petitioner concerning erecting of ''Tati'' on disputed land. Ram Dayal (P.W 9) protested about the altercation on which petitioner No. 1, Deonath Rai ordered to assault and gave him chura blow on his forehead and petitioner No. 3 assaulted him with Bhala on his thigh and petitioner No, 2 assaulted him with chura on his Pakhura and back. After investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioners under Sections 147 148 323 324 and 307, I.P.C. However, the trial Court acquitted the petitioners under other sections and found them guilty under Sections 324 and 148, I.P.C. only and convicted them accordingly.

3.

This application was admitted only on the question of sentence by order dated 30-11-95. The date of occurrence is 7-9-75. About 24 years trial protracted and the petitioners faced physical and mental agony.

4.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they were in jail custody for one month as clear from record of revision. They surrendered at the time of filing of this revision i.e. on 3-11-95 and by order dated 30-11-95 they were granted bail.

5.

Considering the long period of the date of occurrence and the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of sentence is modified to the period undergone by them.

6.

With this modification in the sentence, this revision is dismissed.