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

2015 Supreme(Del) 2902

INDERMEET KAUR
SUMIT – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Appellant : Mr. Dinesh Malik, Adv.
For Respondent: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for the State.

JUDGMENT :

INDERMEET KAUR, J.

1. These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 23.08.2013 & 26.08.2013 respectively wherein the appellant Deep Singh stands convicted under Section 397 read with Sections 32/43 of the IPC. Maximum sentence awarded to him is RI 7years for his conviction under Section 397 of the IPC. For his second conviction, he has been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for 6 months. Nominal roll of the appellant reflects that as on date, he has undergone incarceration of 3 years and 10 months. The second convict Sumit has been convicted under Section 392/34 of the IPC. He has been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for 6 months. His nominal roll has been requisitioned. This reflects that as on date, he has undergone incarceration of 3 years.

2. The version of the prosecution was unfolded in the testimony of the complainant Rashik (PW-4). His version was to the effect that he is a resident of A Block, Sonia Vihar, Delhi. He was working as a bar









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