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

2019 Supreme(Bom) 481

SUNIL B.SHUKRE, PUSHPA V.GANEDIWALA
Hanuman – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
A.M. Sharma, Adv., N.R. Rode, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the leaned counsel for the parties.

2. Heard Mr. A. M. Sharma, the learned counsel appointed for the petitioner and Mr. N. R. Rode, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

3. In this petition, petitioner- a life convict for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code has sought relief under Section 427(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. Undisputedly, while undergoing the sentence of life imprisonment, the petitioner was released on parole on 06.1.2016 for a period of thirty days and it was extended further for sixty days. The petitioner was supposed to surrender before the jail authorities on or before 06.4.2016, but he failed to do so. Therefore, an offence punishable under Section 224 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against him.

4. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhadrawati, after the trial, found the petitioner guilty of the said offence and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days.

5. It i































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