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

2003 Supreme(SC) 923

N.S.HEGDE, B.P.SINGH
K. Pandurangan – Appellant
Versus
S. S. R. Velusamy – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Santosh Hegde, J.-In these appeals, the appellants were charged for offences punishable under Sections 420, 477(a), 468, 420 read with Section 109, 409 read with 109 and 468 read with 109 IPC. The trial Court, namely, the VIth Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Thiruchirapalli, convicted the appellants under various sections, among them, for offences punishable under Section 420 and Section 420 read with 109 IPC. It awarded a maximum sentence of 5 years R.I.

2. On an appeal filed by the convicted accused, the appellate court confirmed the conviction recorded by the trial Court but reduced the sentence to 2-1/2 years each and further acting purportedly under various GOs. of the Government, it granted remission of the said sentence of 2-1/2 years also.

3. In a revision filed by the complainant, the High Court of Judicature at Madras considering the question of jurisdiction of the court to remit the sentence under the various G.Os. came to the conclusion that such a remission could not have been granted by the court, hence, allowed the revision. It also came to the conclusion that there is no need to remit the matter back to the lower appellate court, accordingly, set aside th








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