PRAVEEN KUMAR D.C.JAIN, ,VIDYA BHUSHAN SONI,RAJESH JAIN,KIRAN JAIN vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — CRA/1630/2000
Case under Sec. 383 C.r.p.c - Jail Appeal Section 398. Disposed: Uncontested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 16th April 2026.
CNR: CGHC010000072000
Filing Number
CRA/459/2000
Filing Date
28-06-2000
Registration No
CRA/1630/2000
Registration Date
28-06-2000
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )
Sub-Category
CRIMINAL MATTER IN WHICH SENTENCES AWARDED IS MORE THAN 2 YEARS AND UP TO 10 YEARS ( 1431 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
16th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PARTLY ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PRAVEEN KUMAR D.C.JAIN, ,VIDYA BHUSHAN SONI,RAJESH JAIN,KIRAN JAIN
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
OLD CASES
OLD CASES
ORDERS on IAs
ORDERS on IAs
MOTION HEARING MATTERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | OLD CASES |
| 13-02-2026 | OLD CASES |
| 07-07-2025 | ORDERS on IAs |
| 04-11-2024 | ORDERS on IAs |
| 24-07-2024 | MOTION HEARING MATTERS |
Orders
The Chhattisgarh High Court set aside the appellant's conviction under IPC Section 398 (armed robbery) because the victim failed to identify which accused actually used the deadly weapon—a requirement established by Supreme Court precedent. However, the court upheld conviction under Section 392 (simple robbery) based on clear eyewitness testimony proving the appellant participated in taking ₹1.50 and a wristwatch through threat of injury, and reduced his sentence to time already served (approximately 4.5 years). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Chhattisgarh High Court set aside the appellant's conviction under IPC Section 398 (armed robbery) because the victim failed to identify which accused actually used the deadly weapon—a requirement established by Supreme Court precedent. However, the court upheld conviction under Section 392 (simple robbery) based on clear eyewitness testimony proving the appellant participated in taking ₹1.50 and a wristwatch through threat of injury, and reduced his sentence to time already served (approximately 4.5 years). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts