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

2004 Supreme(SC) 1471

S.H.KAPADIA, ARIJIT PASAYAT
Bankat – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.-Leave granted.

2. Appellants call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The appellants who are described as A-1 and A-2 (hereinafter referred to as the accused ) had questioned correctness of their conviction as recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Osmanabad for offences punishable under Sections 325 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC ).

3. For offence relatable to Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC each of A-1 to A-3 was sentenced by the learned trial Judge to undergo imprisonment for one year and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation. But looking to the age of A-4, he was sentenced to imprisonment for one month and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation. No separate sentence was passed for the offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC.

4. By the impugned judgment, the High Court held that A-3 was not responsible for the injury on the leg of victim Ratnabai (PW-2) and on the head of the victim Manik (PW-1) and taking note of the long passage of time the custodial sentence wa


















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