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

2002 Supreme(Gau) 439

P.P.NAOLEKAR, AMITAVA ROY
Kuldip Chandra Talukdar – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.M.Choudhary, B.M.Choudhary, P.Gayan

AMITAVA ROY, J.:

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.6.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup in Sessions Case No. 100(K) of 1997, convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer R.I. for another three months.

2. We have heard Mr J.M. Choudhury, senior advocate assisted by Mr B.M. Choudhury, advocate for the appellant and Mr P. Gayan, PP, Assam.

3. The case of the prosecution in short is that on 12.11.96, one Anita Das, PW-2, lodged an FIR with the Officer-in-Charge, Hajo Police Station alleging that on 10.11.96 at about 10.30 p.m. the accused appellant and two others (named therein) came to the gate of their house, armed with iron rods, with a view to kill the members of her family out of previous grudge over a pending litigation involving land. They abused the inmates of the house in filthy language, at the same time loudly striking the boundary wall of the house/On hearing this, the elder brother of the informant, Dakshya Raj Kumar came out of the house and asked them to stop the nuisance, whereupon the accused appellant











































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