RAJU vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRA-S/273/2005
Case under No Acts Defined. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 14th May 2026.
CNR: PHHC010141932005
Filing Number
CRA-S/273/2005
Filing Date
08-Feb-2005
Registration No
CRA-S/273/2005
Registration Date
08-Feb-2005
Judge
Mr. Justice N.S. Shekhawat
Coram
Mr. Justice N.S. Shekhawat
Bench Type
Single
Category
36.71 - CRL APPL AGNST CONVICTION GEN UPTO 3 YEARS ( 595 )
Sub-Category
( 944 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL BRANCH
Decision Date
14-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OF
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAJU
Adv. NARENDER HOODA
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF HARYANA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-May-2026
Mr. Justice N.S. ShekhawatView PDF
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana upheld the conviction of appellants Raj @ Rijwan and Rajesh under Section 25 of the Arms Act, finding the prosecution successfully proved they possessed illegal firearms during a planned dacoity on a petrol pump. However, the court reduced their sentences to the period already undergone (over 2 months custody) while maintaining the fine, citing the 23-year trial/appeal duration, their acquittal in related cases, and maintained good conduct since suspension of their earlier sentences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Oct-2018
—
Mrs. Justice Archana Puri
-
02-Jul-2018
—
Mr. Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
-
07-May-2018
—
Mr. Justice Arun Palli
-
08-Jan-2018
—
Mr. Justice Arun Palli
-
11-Jul-2017
—
Lok Adalat Bench - 2
-
03-Jul-2017
—
Mr. Justice Mahavir Singh Chauhan
-
09-Jan-2017
—
Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Verma
-
04-Jul-2016
—
Mr. Justice Dr. Shekher Dhawan
-
10-Feb-2005
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
08-Feb-2005
Case filed
Registration No. CRA-S/273/2005
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana upheld the conviction of appellants Raj @ Rijwan and Rajesh under Section 25 of the Arms Act, finding the prosecution successfully proved they possessed illegal firearms during a planned dacoity on a petrol pump. However, the court reduced their sentences to the period already undergone (over 2 months custody) while maintaining the fine, citing the 23-year trial/appeal duration, their acquittal in related cases, and maintained good conduct since suspension of their earlier sentences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts