BHIRUG REVISIONIST Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Kameshwar Singh, counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) By means of this revision the applicant has challenged the concurrent order of the Judicial Magistrate, Ballia and IIIrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Ballia whereby the applicant has been convicted under Ss.323, 504 and 506(2) IPC. He has been sentenced to one month simple imprisonment under S.323 IPC, one month simple imprisonment under S.504 IPC and one year simple imprisonment under S.506(2) IPC.

(3.) So far as the merits of the case are concerned, both the Courts below have concurrently found that from the prosecution evidence participation of the applicant has been firmly established. P.W.1 complainant had himself received injuries and he narrated full facts leading to the incident in question. His statement has been found trust worthy and reliable by both the Courts below. Learned counsel for the applicant in revision could not point out any infirmity or illegality in the orders of the courts below whereby applicant's conviction has been recorded.