Bijoy Bhushan Bharatiya Borah @ ... vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 4357 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010224272023




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./437/2023

            BIJOY BHUSHAN BHARATIYA BORAH @ BHARATIYA BHUSAN
            BHARATIYA
            S/O SRI BUDHENDRA NATH BORAH
            R/O NEHRU PARK
            P.O. AND P.S. JORHAT
            DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

            2:SMTI. VIMLA DEVI GATTANI @ BIMLA DEVI GATTANI
            W/O SRI RAM KRISHNA GATTANI
             R/O A.T. ROAD
            WARD NO. 4
             P.O. AND P.S. JORHAT
             DIST. JORHAT
            ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR P KATAKI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM


                                   BEFORE
                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

                                          ORDER

16.10.2023

Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.

Page No.# 2/3

Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

2. In this revision petition, under Sections 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner has put to challenge the legality and validity of the judgment and order dated 25.08.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat in Criminal Appeal No. 09/2021.

3. It is to be noted here that vide judgment and order dated 25.08.2023, the learned court below has upheld the judgment and order dated 26.03.2021, whereby the learned CJM, Jorhat in GR Case No. 3832/2016, has convicted the petitioner under Section 420 of the IPC to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation.

4. Mr. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment and order dated 25.08.2023, so passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat, suffers from manifest illegality, as the learned Sessions Judge has no power to enhance the punishment while no appeal is preferred to enhance the sentence. Mr. Kataki further submits that the mortgage deed has not been executed before the learned trial court and therefore, Mr. Kataky has contended to allow the petition.

5. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties it is provided that let notice be issued to the respondent No. 2, within a week from today, returnable in 4 weeks, by registered post with A/D and also by usual process. As Mr. Borthakur has appeared and accepted notice on behalf of the State respondent, no formal notice is required to be issued. However, extra requisite copy of the petition be furnished to the State respondent during the course of the day.

6. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the Page No.# 3/3

parties, it is provided that till disposal of this petition, the impugned judgment and order 25.08.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat and judgment and order26.03.2021, passed by the learned CJM, Jorhat, stands stayed.

7. The Registry to call for the record from the learned court below.

8. List the matter after 4 [four] weeks.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant