Ashok vs.state

Ashok vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 24, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1214473

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/1214473
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Apr 24, 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

Ashok

Respondent

State

Excerpt

$~20 * in the high court of delhi at new delhi decided on :24. h april, 2018 w.p.(crl) 518/2018 ........ petitioner through : none. versus ashok state ..... respondent through : mr.rahul mehra, standing counsel. si prashant, ps new usmanpur. + coram: hon'ble mr. justice s.p.garg s.p.garg, j.(oral) 1. present writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india read with section 427(1) and section 482 cr.p.c. has been filed by the petitioner to direct the concurrent running of the sentences in fir no.431/2009 registered under sectionsipc at police station new usmanpur. status report is on record.2. i have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. the petitioner was convicted by the trial court for commission of offences punishable under sectionsipc by a judgment dated 07.12.2010. by an order on sentence dated 10.12.2010, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo ri for three years with fine `1,000/- under section 363 and ri for ten years with fine `5,000/- under section 376 ipc. the order on sentence is, however, w.p.(crl.) 518/2018 page 1 of 2 silent whether both the sentences were to run concurrently or consecutively.3. nominal roll dated 06.02.2018 reveals that the petitioner has already undergone eight years, one month and eight days incarceration besides remission for one year, seven months and twelve days as on 05.02.2018. it further reveals that he is not involved in any other criminal case and his overall jail conduct is satisfactory.4. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, both the sentences under sections 363 ipc and 376 ipc awarded by the court below are ordered to run concurrently.5. 6. the writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. copy of the order be sent to the superintendent jail for information. april24 2018 / tr (s.p.garg) judge w.p.(crl.) 518/2018 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :

24. h APRIL, 2018 W.P.(CRL) 518/2018 ........ Petitioner

Through : None. versus ASHOK STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel. SI Prashant, PS New Usmanpur. + CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.

(Oral) 1. Present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 427(1) and Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner to direct the concurrent running of the sentences in FIR No.431/2009 registered under Sections
IPC at Police Station New Usmanpur. Status report is on record.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. The petitioner was convicted by the Trial Court for commission of offences punishable under Sections
IPC by a judgment dated 07.12.2010. By an order on sentence dated 10.12.2010, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo RI for three years with fine `1,000/- under Section 363 and RI for ten years with fine `5,000/- under Section 376 IPC. The order on sentence is, however, W.P.(Crl.) 518/2018 Page 1 of 2 silent whether both the sentences were to run concurrently or consecutively.

3. Nominal Roll dated 06.02.2018 reveals that the petitioner has already undergone eight years, one month and eight days incarceration besides remission for one year, seven months and twelve days as on 05.02.2018. It further reveals that he is not involved in any other criminal case and his overall jail conduct is satisfactory.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, both the sentences under Sections 363 IPC and 376 IPC awarded by the Court below are ordered to run concurrently.

5. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Copy of the order be sent to the Superintendent jail for information. APRIL24 2018 / tr (S.P.GARG) JUDGE W.P.(Crl.) 518/2018 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Ashok vs State Same Subject Land Acquisition