Back
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
Mohd. Danish – Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. Of NCT Delhi) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.)
1. The Present Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 05.03.2022 and the order on sentence dated 31.03.2022 passed by Sh. Naveen Gupta, Additional Sessions Judge-05, District Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, in SC No. 1005/2016 arising out of FIR No. 153/2016, registered under Sections 394/397/411/34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Jagat Puri, Delhi whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 394 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and Section 397 IPC and Section 25 (1B) of the Arms Act and has been sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.30,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment of six months for commission of offence punishable under Section 394 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 397 IPC. The convict is further sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.5,000, in default to undergo simple imprisonment of two months for commission of offence punishable under Section 25 (1B) of the Arms Act.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that on receipt of DD No. 14- A 21.05.2016, SI Pravee
The appellate court must independently review evidence and legal reasoning, ensuring justice and rectifying errors in lower court judgments.
Victim's credible testimony and corroborating evidence established sufficient grounds for conviction under IPC and Arms Act despite minor discrepancies.
The court reduced the appellant's sentence for illegal possession of a firearm due to its harshness while affirming the conviction for assault under IPC, emphasizing the need for correct punitive mea....
Guilt of accused having not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, conviction and sentence cannot be upheld.
(1) Examination of accused – Object of Section 313 of Cr.P.C. is to establish a direct dialogue between court and accused – A reasonable opportunity entails putting all adverse evidences in the form ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the offence under Section 397 IPC, the victim must have noticed the deadly weapon used by the offender to establish the element of 'use of....
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; failure to adhere to legal standards and evidentiary requirements can result in acquittal.
Prosecution must prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence and unreliable testimonies can lead to acquittal.
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
