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

DORAISWAMY RAJU, ARIJIT PASAYAT
State of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Karnail Singh – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Y.P. Dhingra, Bimal Roy Jad, Advocates.
For the Respondent:P.N. Puri, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.—State of Punjab is in appeal questioning the legality of judgment rendered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court directing acquittal of the respondents Karnail Singh and Nirmal Singh. Learned Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, had found both the accused persons to be guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’). Life sentence was imposed on each, with fine of Rs.1,000/-. Additionally, accused Karnail Singh was convicted for offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC while accused Nirmal Singh was convicted for offences punishable under Section 307 IPC. Each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous im­prisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each. During pendency of appeal before this Court, accused-appellant Nirmal Singh expired. Since no application in terms of Section 394 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Cr.P.C.’) has been filed, the appeal abates so far he is concerned.

2. In a nutshell the prosecution version is as follows:

Gurdial Singh @ Kala (hereinafter referred as ‘the deceased’) had five brothers, namely, Piara Singh, Swaran Singh, Charan Singh, De

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