AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 211 wordsHon''ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.—Both the revisionists are present, in person, along with their counsel Mr. Lokendra Dobhal.
Learned counsel for the revisionists argued that revisionists were convicted only on the basis of evidence adduced by two police constables. Stolen articles worth Rs. 12,000/- were alleged to be recovered from their possession. They are poor persons so he does not want to argue the matter on merits. He has only requested for reducing the quantum of sentence.
Learned counsel for the revisionists apprised this Court that revisionists were in jail for almost twenty days and rather than fine of Rs. 1,000/-, they are ready to accept if the same is enhanced, as sentence.
Having considered the social and economic status of the revisionists as well as nature of the offence and other circumstances, the revision is partly allowed on the question of sentence reducing it to the period already undergone while rest of the jail sentence is converted to fine of Rs. 10,000/- in total by cash including Rs. 1,000/- which has already been deposited by them.
Revision is dismissed on merits while it is partly allowed on the quantum of sentence, as modified above. Revisionists are directed to deposit the fine within two months from today.