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

1969 Supreme(SC) 513

A. N. RAY, I. D. DUA, M. HIDAYATULLAH
Laiq Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant :Vikram Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents:P.N. Raina, Sr. Advocate and J.A. Hamal, Advocate

Judgment

HIDAYATULLAH, C.J.I. :- The appellant Laiq Singh, a former member of the legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh is the appellant before us with several others who all have been convicted under Section 365 read with Section 149 and Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. Laiq Singh has been sentenced in the aggregate to three years; rigorous imprisonment and the others have been sentenced in the aggregate to one year s rigorous imprisonment. Previously, the Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur had acquitted them in the trial before him. The State Government appealed and the acquittal was set aside and the conviction and the sentences as stated above resulted.

2. In the appeal before the High Court parties had put in an application for compounding the offence. There were several other offences with which these persons were charged. They were all compoundable. The offence for which they stand now convicted could not be compounded even with the permission of the Court with the result that the acquittal was recorded by the High Court in respect of the other offences, but the conviction and sentences in respect of the two offences which were mentioned above have been recorded.

3. In argu




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