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

R.K.BATTA
Abdul Sajid Abdul Sadiq – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the parties:
For the Applicant:Mr. Rajendra Daga. Advocate.
For the Respondent: Ms. Neeta Jog, APP.

JUDGMENT ORAL

R.K. Batta, JJ.- The applicant was tried for attempt to commit murder under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, along with two others. The co-accused were acquitted of the charge, but the applicant was held guilty under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to R.I. for two years as also fine of Rs. 1.000/-, In default, to suffer R.I. for one month. The appellant filed an appeal before the Sessions Court and the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Washim dismissed the appeal. The appellant challenges the concurrent findings of two courts below by filing this revision.

2. Learned Advocate for the applicant urged before me that even on admitted facts the offend as against the applicant would not fall under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code but that it would fall under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. In support of this submission, it is urged by him that PW3 admits that there was scuffle between the applicant and victim Mushtaq and the injury in question is alleged to have been inflicted during the said scuine. According to the learned Advocate for the applicant, though according to the doctor the injury in question is said

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