mohd.umar vs.the State

mohd.umar vs The State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Jan 18, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1212124

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1212124
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Jan 18, 2018
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

mohd.umar

Respondent

The State

Excerpt

.....of an order dated 23.09.2017 of learned additional sessions judge in crl.a.no.199/2017 whereby the findings of the trial court on conviction in case fir no.under sectionipc registered at police station kashmere gate (metro) by a judgment dated 09.08.2017 were confirmed. the revision petition is contested by the respondent.2. i have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. crl.rev.p.823/2017 page 1 of 2 3. on perusal of the file it reveals that the petitioner was convicted under section 379 ipc by an order dated 09.08.2017 of learned metropolitan magistrate and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years with fine `5,000/- by an order dated 11.09.2017. the said order was challenged in crl.a.no.199/2017. during the course of arguments in appeal, the appellant opted to give up challenge to the findings recorded on conviction by the learned trial court. a prayer was made before the appellate court to take lenient view and to modify the sentence. the appellate court vide its judgment dated 23.09.2017 reduced the sentence to simple imprisonment for nine months while maintaining the imposition of fine.4. the appellate court has already taken lenient view and has modified the sentence. the allegations against the petitioner are that he was apprehended red handed at the spot while picking pocket of the complainant. the petitioner is involved in number of similar cases.5. considering the gravity of the offence and the serious allegations, no further modification in the sentence order is called for. the revision petition being unmerited is dismissed. all pending application(s) also stand disposed of.6. 7. s.p.garg (judge) january18 2018/sa crl.rev.p.823/2017 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : JANUARY18 2018 + Crl.Rev.P.823/2017 and Crl.M.B.1916/2017 MOHD.UMAR ........ Petitioner

Through : Mr.U.M.Tripathi, Advocate. versus THE STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP. ASI Rajesh Kumar, PS Kashmiri Gate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.

(OPEN COURT) 1. Present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 23.09.2017 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.199/2017 whereby the findings of the Trial Court on conviction in case FIR No.
under Section
IPC registered at Police Station Kashmere Gate (Metro) by a judgment dated 09.08.2017 were confirmed. The revision petition is contested by the respondent.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Crl.Rev.P.823/2017 Page 1 of 2 3. On perusal of the file it reveals that the petitioner was convicted under Section 379 IPC by an order dated 09.08.2017 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate and was sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two years with fine `5,000/- by an order dated 11.09.2017. The said order was challenged in Crl.A.No.199/2017. During the course of arguments in appeal, the appellant opted to give up challenge to the findings recorded on conviction by the learned trial court. A prayer was made before the appellate court to take lenient view and to modify the sentence. The appellate court vide its judgment dated 23.09.2017 reduced the sentence to Simple Imprisonment for nine months while maintaining the imposition of fine.

4. The appellate court has already taken lenient view and has modified the sentence. The allegations against the petitioner are that he was apprehended red handed at the spot while picking pocket of the complainant. The petitioner is involved in number of similar cases.

5. Considering the gravity of the offence and the serious allegations, no further modification in the sentence order is called for. The revision petition being unmerited is dismissed. All pending application(s) also stand disposed of.

6. 7. S.P.GARG (JUDGE) JANUARY18 2018/sa Crl.Rev.P.823/2017 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties mohd.umar vs The State Same Subject Land Acquisition