MOHAMMED SULAIMAN Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Amit Kapri, Advocate holding brief of Smt. Pushpa Joshi, Advocate for the revisionist and Sri M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State.

(2.) THIS revision has been directed against the judgment and order dated 17.7.2002 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge/ FTC Kashipur, District U.S. Nagar wherein the judgment and order of Additional CJM Kashipur dated 20.10.2000 was confirmed to the extent that accused/revisionist was ordered to undergo six months' imprisonment instead of one year, as passed by the lower court. The Additional Sessions Judge confirmed rest of the part of the sentence which imposes Rs. 46,000/ - fine upon the revisionist/accused. In default of fine, it was ordered that he will undergo three months R.I. in addition. Besides, it was also ordered to pay Rs. 4,000/ - as the cost of litigation payable to the complainant. Out of this fine, Rs. 23,000/ - was payable to the complainant as the amount of cheque.

(3.) HAVING gone through the grounds of revision, it appears that in all the three grounds mentioned in the revision memo, the same are vague and superficial. There is no substance at all in these grounds. No irregularity or irregularity or glaring mistake in the appreciation of evidence has been indicated in either of the grounds of revision. So, this revision is bereft of merit and liable to be dismissed. Revision is, accordingly, dismissed. Copy of this order along with the lower court record be sent back.