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

2025 Supreme(SC) 934

B. V. NAGARATHNA, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Pintu Thakur @ Ravi Etc. – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Md. Farman, AOR, Mr. Salman Khan, Adv., Mr. Aditya Tanwar, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Apoorv Shukla, AOR, Mr. Prabhleen A. Shukla, Adv.

ORDER :

Leave granted.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 26.04.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1686/2023 and Criminal Appeal No.2130/2023 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, the appellants are before this Court. By the said judgment, the appellants were convicted as under:

Conviction Under Section

Jail Sentence Rigorous

Fine

In Default of Payment of Fine

363 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC)

5 years

Rs.500/-

1 month

366 of the IPC

5 years

Rs.500/-

1 month

342 of the IPC

1 year

Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012

Imprisonment for life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of natural life

Rs.15,000/-

2 months

All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants made a two-fold submission: firstly, he contended that the very conviction of the appellants by the Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Special Court (POSCO Act) Ramanujganj, District Balrampur in Special Sessions (POCSO) Case No.36/2020 was erroneous.

4. Secondly, it was submitted that if this Court is not inclined to interfere with the con

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