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

2009 Supreme(SC) 850

ARIJIT PASAYAT, ASOK KUMAR GANGULY
MATHURA SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
REFERRED TO : Manoj and Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2008 9 SCC 116

ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, allowing the appeal filed by the appellants in part. The appellants were convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sultanpur, for offences punishable under Sections 307 and 324 both read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'ipc' ). For the offence relatable to Section 307 read with Section 34 each was sentenced for imprisonment for five years R. I. and for the offence under Section 323/34 each was sentenced for six months R. I. 2. By the impugned judgment the High Court altered the conviction to Section 324 read with Section 34 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC. It is not necessary to go into the factual aspects in detail as an application has been filed by the complainant and the accused persons stating that the occurrence took place nearly 25 years back and the parties are related to each other and, therefore, they may be permitted to compound the offences. Individual affidavits of all the parties have been filed. It is to be noted that one of the injured persons Mutra Devi has expired on 23.







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