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

M.B.SHAH, G.B.PATTANAIK
Ambika Prasadetc – Appellant
Versus
State (Delhi Administration, Delhi) – Respondent


Judgment

Shah, J.—These appeals are filed against the judgment and order dated 21.3.1997 passed by the High Court of Delhi dismissing Criminal Appeals No. 45/92, 49/92 and 50/92 filed by the present appellants, which arise out of common judgment and order dated 24.3.1992 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 508/91. In all six persons namely Ambika Prasad (A1), Krishanpal (A2), Ram Adhar (A3), Ram Chand­er (A4), Shiv Raj Singh (A5) and Rajinder Singh (A6) were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 148 IPC, 341 read with 149 IPC, 307 read with 149 IPC and 302 read with 149 IPC. Additionally, accused Ram Chander (A4) was charged for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Out of them two were acquitted and appellants Ambika Prasad, Krishanpal Singh, Ram Chander and Rajinder Singh were convict­ed for the offences under Section 302/34 IPC, and 341/34 IPC and 307/34 IPC. For sentence, the trial Court observed that murder ap­peared to be pre-planned. Accused Ram Chander was a famous wrestler and for other no criminal antecedent was brought to the notice of the Court, therefore, it was held that it was not one of the rarest of the rare

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