Back
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY
Shyamapada Saha – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prosecution must establish a case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. arguments from defense about insufficiency of evidence (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 3. court's analysis and reasoning not convinced of guilt (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 4. decision to allow appeal based on insufficient proof (Para 53) |
| 5. closing remarks and procedural orders (Para 54 , 55 , 56 , 57) |
JUDGMENT :
Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.
1. This instant criminal appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 28.04.09 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 1st Court, Malda in Sessions Case No. 18/2006 being Sessions Trial NO. 1(1)/2008, convicting the appellants under Section 498A/304B/34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and sentencing the appellants to suffer simple imprisonment for 7 years each for the offence 304B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-each in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for 2 months each for the offence under Sect
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
