FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, AMITAVA ROY
State of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Suraj Prakash – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Amitava Roy J.
The subject matter of challenge in both these appeals is the judgment and order dated 22nd January, 2009 rendered by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal 172-DB of 2006, whereby it has affirmed the conviction and Criminal Appeal No. 2056 of 2009 sentence of accused No.1 Dharminder, accused No. 4 Rani, his mother and accused No.5 Nazar Singh under Section 302, 419, 404, 201, 120B of the Indian Penal Code. While acquitting accused No. 2 Suraj and accused No.3 Bhalla Ram of the charge under Section 302/120B IPC it affirmed their conviction under Sections 419, 404, 201 IPC. Whereas Criminal Appeal No.2056 of 2009 has been preferred by the State against the exoneration of accused No. 2 Suraj and accused No. 3 Bhalla Ram from the charge under Section 302/120B IPC, accused No. 4, Rani is in appeal before this Court against her conviction under the above provisions of law. Accused No. 1 and Accused No. 5 have not preferred any appeal.
2. We have heard Mr. V. Madhukar, learned Additional Advocate General for the State as well as Mr. A.P.S. Deol, learned senior counsel for the accused.
3. The prosecution was set in motion in the wee hours of 23rd June
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.