YOGESH SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE has turned up on behalf of the revisionist in any of the revised calls till 4 pm, while Mr. P.S. Bohara, learned Brief Holder, is present on behalf of the State. So, I have considered the revision on its merit.

(2.) THIS revision has been directed against the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Almora dated 8.10.2002, whereby the Appeal No. 3/2000 was dismissed. The said appeal was preferred against the judgment and order dated 9.2.2000, delivered by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Almora, whereby the revisionist accused Yogesh Singh was convicted for the offence of Section 279 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment. He was also found guilty for the offence of Section 304A Indian Penal Code, 1860 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of rupees one thousand. In default of payment of fine, revisionist was directed to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences of imprisonment mentioned above were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) THE other grounds, raised by the revisionist that the provisions of Section 235(2) Code of Criminal Procedure were ignored or he was not given an opportunity of hearing on the point of sentence, are quite against the record. On going through the lower court judgment, it is explicitly clear that the accused was given an opportunity of hearing to the revisionist personally as well as through his counsel before passing the order on the quantum of sentence. After finding him guilty on 9.2.2000, he was taken into custody and asked to advance the submissions on the point of quantum of sentence.