K.G.BALAKRISHNAN, R.P.SETHI
Ayyub – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P – Respondent
JUDGMENT
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.-The appellants in these two appeals were found guilty by the Designated Judge (TADA), Meerut, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(2)(i) of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter called as the TADA Act ) and also for offences punishable under Section 302 and Section 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The appellants were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- u/s 3(1)(2)(i) of TADA and in default of payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year. The appellants were sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for one year under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The appellants were also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of five years and a fine of Rs. 3,000/- under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for six months. The appellants were further found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years for the offences under Section 4 of the Prevention of Damages to Property Act, 1984.
2. The prosecution case against th
State of Bihar v. Ram Naresh Pandey and Anr.
Sarwan Singh Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab, etc.etc.
Sharafat Hussain Abdul Rahaman Shaikh & Ors. v. State of Gujarat and another
State of Orissa v. Chandrika Mohapatra and Others
Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab
R.M. Tewari, Advocate v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors. etc.etc.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.