U. T. Administration of Lakshadweep vs Mohammed Faizal

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 802

B. V. NAGARATHNA, UJJAL BHUYAN
U. T. Administration of Lakshadweep – Appellant
Versus
Mohammed Faizal – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Dr. Menaka Guruswamy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, AOR Mr. Ibad Mushtaq, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Pratap, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Rai, Adv. Mr. Lavkesh Bhambhani, Adv. Mr. K. M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, AOR Mr. Anuj Udupa, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ritin Rai, Sr. Adv. Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Amit Bhandari, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma A S, Adv. Mr. Koya Arafa, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Purohit, Adv. Mr. Prakhar Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR Ms. Apoorv Kurup, Adv. Mr. K.V.Sreemuthin, Adv. Ms. Mrinal Elkar Mazumdar, Adv. Mr. Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav, Adv.

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. The Union Territory Administration of Lakshadweep and the complainant have preferred these appeals assailing the Order dated 25.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.1/2023 in Criminal Appeal No.49/2023 by the Kerala High Court. The said application was filed by the first respondent herein seeking suspension of his conviction vide judgment and sentence passed in SC No.1/2017 on the file of Sessions Court, Kavaratti, Union Territory of Lakshadweep. By the said judgment dated 11.01.2023, the first respondent was found guilty of the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 427, 448, 422, 324, 342, 307 and 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC, 1860”, for short) and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for periods ranging from one month to ten years. The sentence of ten years imprisonment was imposed for the offence under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC, 1860.

3. Learned Additional Solicitor General, Sri K.M. Nataraj, appearing for the appellant Union Territory Administration of Lakshadweep drew our attention to the impugned order, particularly paragraphs 14 onwards to contend that the High Court has misdirected i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 802

B. V. NAGARATHNA, UJJAL BHUYANU. T. Administration of Lakshadweep – AppellantVersusMohammed Faizal – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

B. V. NAGARATHNA, UJJAL BHUYAN
U. T. Administration of Lakshadweep – Appellant
Versus
Mohammed Faizal – Respondent