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

1994 Supreme(SC) 965

A.S.ANAND, M.K.MUKHERJEE
Rajbir – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


(1) THE appellant has been convicted by the learned Judge of the Designated Court, Bhiwani for an offence under Section 307, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs 50,000.00, in default of payment of fine to further imprisonment for three years. He has also been convicted under Section 3 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the TADA Act) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs 1,000.00 and in default to further imprisonment for one month. He has also been convicted for an offence under Section 6 of the TADA Act read with Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for one month. Substantive sentences for offences under Sections 3 and 6 of the TADA Act read with Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act were directed to run concurrently but the same were to run consecutively with the substantive sentence for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. A further di









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