Sushil Sharma VS State

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
Sushil Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. N. Hariharan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Sahni, Mr. Anshul Bajaj, Ms. Anamika, Mr. Vaibhav Mishra, Mr. Priyank, Ms. Anju Vaid, Mr. Sharang Dhulia, Mr. Aditya Vaibhav, Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Mr. Akhil Kumar Gola and Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Criminal) with Mr. Chaitanya Gosain, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Pandey, OSD (Legal), GNCTD with Mr. Prashant Kr. Verma, OIC (Legal) Prisons.

JUDGMENT :

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.

1. The constitutional courts have often reiterated the principle that those who feel called upon to deprive other persons of their personal liberty in the discharge of what they conceive to be their duty, must strictly and scrupulously observe the forms and rules of law. [Ref: Ram Narayan Singh vs. State of Delhi reported as 1953 AIR 277].

2. Predicated on the above doctrine and in the facts and circumstances of the case as elaborated hereafter, we are of the considered view that, the continued incarceration of the petitioner before us, does not admit of legal justification and lawful sanction.

3. We are, therefore, directing that he be set at liberty forthwith.

4. Sushil Kumar Sharma was tried for offences punishable under Section 302/120-B, read with Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’).

5. The Trial Court, by way of judgment and order dated 03.11.2003, was pleased to convict Sushil Kumar Sharma under Sections 302, 120-B, read with Section 201 IPC.

6. Sushil Kumar Sharma was sentenced to capital punishment. The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGALSushil Sharma – AppellantVersusState – Respondent

Cases Referred (8)

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
Sushil Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent