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

2015 Supreme(P&H) 2291

JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Rajesh @ Pappu Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Vivek Goel, Advocate, for the Amicus Curiae in CRA S-288-SB of 2004; Ms. Aditi Girdhar, Advocate, for the Amicus Curiae in CRA S-320-SB of 2004
For the Respondent: Mehardeep Singh, DAG

JUDGMENT :

Jitendra Chauhan, J.

These two appeals are being decided by the common judgment, preferred by the accused-appellants, against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 12.12.2003, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Ludhiana vide which they were convicted and sentenced as under:-

Offence

Sentence

Fine

In default

376(2)(g) IPC

RI for 10 years

Rs.1000/-

RI for 3 months

The facts of the case as noticed in para no. 2 of the judgment of the trial Court are as under :-

"The prosecution case stands registered on the basis of statement of prosecutrix Bhuman Kalan which was recorded by SI Balwinder Singh on 08.10.2000. The prosecutrix has averred in her statement that she was married with Prem Bahadur, who at the time of occurrence was working as Peon in M/s Pathak Machine tools, Ludhiana. She along with her husband used to reside in the same factory. On 07.10.2000 at about 2:30 p.mshe along with her husband went to Jamalpur colony in order to witness the Dushehra

















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