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

2005 Supreme(SC) 111

S.H.KAPADIA, ARIJIT PASAYAT
Sunil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

Leave granted.

2. All these appeals are directed against common judgment of the Rajasthan High Court by which the appeals preferred by eight accused persons including present appellants were disposed of. While Ramesh, son of Harish Chandra was convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the `IPC) and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation, the other seven i.e. present appellants were convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and were each sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each with default stipulation. Each of the eight accused persons were convicted in terms of Section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment. Ramesh, son of Harish Chandra who was convicted in terms of Section 302 IPC, has not preferred any appeal, while the rest seven accused persons have preferred the present appeals.

3. Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows:

On October 29, 1998 around 11 A.M. informant Yogendra Singh (PW-1) submitted written report to one Phool















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