SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 910

H.K.SEMA, Y.K.SABHARWAL
Ranjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent


ORDER

Six accused, including the four appellants, were forwarded by the police to the concerned court to stand trial for offences under various provisions of I.P.C., The Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (in short the TADA Act ) and The Arms Act. One of them (Gurbachan Singh) was declared proclaimed offender. Another (Jagmail Singh) died. The remaining four, namely appellants were convicted for the offences for which they were tried. For offences under Sections 307/149 IPC and Sections 3 & 5 of the TADA Act, rigorous imprisonment for five years for each of these offences and fine was imposed on each of the appellants. For offences under Section 148 IPC two years rigorous imprisonment and for offences under Section 363/149 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act one year s rigorous imprisonment and fine was imposed on each of the appellants. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The appellants have challenged the judgment and order of learned Additional Judge, Designated Court, Nabha, in this appeal filed under Section 19 of the TADA Act.

2. The appellants have been convicted for the incident of encounter alleged to have been taken place, accord






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top