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

2005 Supreme(SC) 787

B.N.AGARWAL, H.K.SEMA
UTHEM RAJANNA – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


ORDER

1. The appellant herein was convicted by the trial court under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs 500; in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months. He was further convicted under Section 338 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The appellant was also convicted under Section 337 IPC and sentenced to pay fine of Rs 500; in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The sentences, however, were ordered to run concurrently. On appeal being preferred, the Sessions Court confirmed the convictions whereafter revisions were preferred a before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which have been dismissed in limine. Hence, these appeals by special leave.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. It has been stated that the appellant has remained in custody for a period of more than three months. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met in case the sentences of imprisonment awarded against the appellant are r

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