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

2015 Supreme(SC) 1115

KURIAN JOSEPH, ARUN MISHRA
ALI HASAN @ MALLAH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Judgment

Kurian, J.

Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State.

3. The appellant is aggrieved by the conviction under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and sentence of ten years and one year respectively with default clause. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, We are of the considered view that hearing of the appeal be limited to quantum of sentence. Neither the Trial Court nor the High Court has given any indication for the award of ten years under Section 376 IPC. Having regard to the facts of the case, we are of view that ends of justice would be met by limiting the sentence to the prescribed minimum. Therefore, the sentence under Section 376 is modified to the prescribed minimum of seven years.

4. We make it clear that no other modification is made in the sentence under Section 506 or in the default clause. However, the sentences shall run concurrently.

The appeal is partly allowed as above.

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