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

2014 Supreme(SC) 483

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, RANJAN GOGOI
PRITAM CHAUHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) – Respondent


JUDGMENT

RANJAN GOGOI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant had been convicted under Section 307 IPC by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in Sessions Case No.28/2000 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years alongwith fine. In appeal, the High Court of Delhi had altered the conviction of the appellant to one under Section 326 IPC with consequential modification of the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. The High Court, further directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation to the victim, Sunder Singh, under the provisions of Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and the sentence imposed, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

3. We have heard Mr. Mohd. Hanif Rashid, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Mohan Jain, learned Addl. Solicitor General for the State.

4. The culpability of the appellant for the criminal acts attributed to him need not be gone into in the present appeal inasmuch as the arguments on behalf of the appellant had centred around the quantum of sentence to be imposed and, in fact, the notice issued by this Court on 06.12.2013 was




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