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

2008 Supreme(SC) 1026

ARIJIT PASAYAT, P.SATHASIVAM
Bhupinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
U. T. of Chandigarh – Respondent


JUDGMENT

ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. Though in SLP (Crl.) No.6796 of 2006, notice has not been issued, at the request of and with the consent of the parties, the same was taken up along with SLP (Crl.) No.1411 of 2007 where notice had been issued.

4. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No.698-SB/1999. The appellant- Bhupinder Singh (hereinafter referred to as the `accused) had filed the appeal before the High Court against the judgment dated 20.9.1999 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, convicting him for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short `the Code). He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulations for the first offence and rigorous imprisonment for nine months in respect of the second offence.

5. The prosecution version, as unfolded during trial, is as follows:

Complainant-Manjit Kaur filed a complaint stating that she was employed as Clerk in All Bank Employees Urban Salary Earners Thrift Credit

















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