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

1999 Supreme(SC) 1295

G.B.PATTANAIK, M.B.SHAH
Mohd. Ayubdhar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Nct Of Delhi – Respondent


(1) THE two appellants have been convicted under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of TADA and Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act as well as under Sections 302/120-B IPC. For their conviction under different provisions of TADA, they have been sentenced to imprisonment for five years and six years respectively and for their conviction under Sections 302/120-B, they have been sentenced to imprisonment for life. From the records, it transpires that Appellant 1 Mohd. Ayubdhar was arrested in a hotel on 6-5-1991 and it is alleged by the prosecution that explosive substance was recovered from him. For this incident, FIR No. 178 of 1991 was made and investigation proceeded with. On the same day, that is on 6-5- 1991, sometime later the other accused also was arrested and certain explosive substances were recovered from him and the FIR that was registered in respect of him was FIR No. 179 of 1991. Besides this, two FIRs, one in respect of an incident of explosion that had occurred outside Delite Cinema on 25-1-1991 when a case had been registered which was FIR No. 30 of 1991 and another incident that happened inside the toilet of Jubilee Cinema on 27-1-1991, as a result of which on


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