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

2018 Supreme(SC) 31

RANJAN GOGOI, R.BANUMATHI
PRANJAY PURUSHOTAMBHAI GORADIA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent


ORDER

1. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. Limited notice was issued in the Special Leave Petition wherein leave to appeal has been prayed for to challenge the judgment of the Bombay High Court convicting the accused appellant for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC” for short). Sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees two lakh) was imposed on the accused appellant with the further direction that the fine amount, once recovered, will be paid to the victim.

4. There are materials on record to suggest that the victim refused to accept any compensation. Because of the injuries suffered by her at the hands of the accused appellant, on account of a frustrated love affair, the victim has become a paraplegic.

5. Time and again this Court has emphasized the wide discretion that is vested in the courts in our country in the matter of imposition of sentence of imprisonment. Section 307 IPC, under which the accused appellant has been sentenced, contemplates as under:

"307. Attempt to murder.- Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if







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