Skip to content


Dharam Singh Vs. the State of M.P. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Dharam Singh

Respondent

The State of M.P.

Excerpt:


crr no.1282/1999 criminal revision no.1282/1999 13.3.2013 none for the applicant. shri prakash gupta, panel lawyer for the state/respondent. it appears that no one is appearing on behalf of the applicant since long to argue the matter. the applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 3 of m.p.vanopaj parivahan gaman rules, 1961 read with section 42 of the forest act and sentenced for 2 months and 17 days with a fine of rs.500/-, whereas the sentenced has already undergone by the applicant and fine was deposited before the trial court. after considering the evidence adduced against the applicant and the judgments passed by both the courts below, i am of the view that appreciation of evidence was done by the trial court as well as by the appellate court in a proper manner. there is no basis by which any interference can be done in the conviction directed by the learned cjm, seoni. so far as the sentence is concerned, it is already executed. under such circumstances, the revision filed by the applicant is hereby dismissed. crr no.1282/1999 a copy of the order be sent to the trial court as well as to the appellate court for information. (n.k.gupta) judge pushpendra

Judgment:


CRR No.1282/1999 Criminal Revision No.1282/1999 13.3.2013 None for the applicant.

Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent.

It appears that no one is appearing on behalf of the applicant since long to argue the matter.

The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 3 of M.P.Vanopaj Parivahan Gaman Rules, 1961 read with section 42 of the Forest Act and sentenced for 2 months and 17 days with a fine of Rs.500/-, whereas the sentenced has already undergone by the applicant and fine was deposited before the trial Court.

After considering the evidence adduced against the applicant and the judgments passed by both the Courts below, I am of the view that appreciation of evidence was done by the trial Court as well as by the appellate court in a proper manner.

There is no basis by which any interference can be done in the conviction directed by the learned CJM, Seoni.

So far as the sentence is concerned, it is already executed.

Under such circumstances, the revision filed by the applicant is hereby dismissed.

CRR No.1282/1999 A copy of the order be sent to the trial Court as well as to the appellate Court for information.

(N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE Pushpendra


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //