Patna High CourtCR. REV./399/2017dismissed

Manoj Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-11Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.399 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Manoj Singh, son of Rajendra Singh @ Mandal Singh, Resident of Village- Gamhariya, Police Station- Nokha, District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ebrahim Kabir For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner who was a juvenile as on the date of the occurrence has been found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the Juvenile Justice Board, Rohtas at Sasarm, by an order, dated 08.02.2016 passed in connection with JJB Case No. 59 of 2014, which arose out of Nokha P.S. case No. 168 of 2000 and ordered to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-. He preferred appeal against the said order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, which has been dismissed by judgment and order, dated 04.02.2017 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2016 by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram. The present criminal revision application has been filed under Section 52 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of

Children) Act, 2000, aggrieved by the said judgment and order, dated 04.02.2017 passed by the appellate Court. I have perused the impugned judgment and order and I have considered the grounds taken in the present application to assail the impugned judgment and order. It appears that the appellate court below has duly appreciated the evidence of the witnesses. There is no plea taken on behalf of the petitioner that the deposition of any witness has been wrongly described in the impugned judgment and order.

In such circumstance, the findings recorded by the appellate Court cannot be said to be suffering from perversity and illegality. The findings of the Court below have been concurred by the appellate Court.

I do not see any compelling circumstance to interfere with the impugned judgment and order.

This application has no merit and it is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ArunKumar/- U