INDERMEET KAUR
Sunil Chand Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Indermeet Kaur, J.
1. Appellants before this Court are Sunil Chand and Bimla Devi. They are aggrieved by the judgment and order of sentence dated 07.12.2001 and 13.12.2001 respectively wherein accused Sunil Chand had been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC; co-accused Bimla Devi had been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC as also for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109 of the IPC. Accused Sunil Chand had been sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for three months. Accused Bimla Devi had also been sentenced for the same period with the same amount of fine for the offence under Section 498A IPC; for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109 IPC Bimla Devi had been sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for three months. These sentences were to run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. had been accrued to the appellants.
2. The version of the prosecution was unfolded in the testimony of prosecutrix (PW-1). As per her statement she married Sunil Chand on 2
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.