Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SURESHWAR THAKUR, LALIT BATRA
Guriqbal Singh @ Vicky Sekhon – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Since both the appeals (supra) arise from a common verdict, made by the learned trial Judge concerned, hence both are amenable for a common verdict being made thereons.2. Both the appeals (supra) are directed against the impugned verdict, as made on 28.10.2022, upon case bearing CIS No. SC/36119/2013, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana wherethrough in respect of charges respectively drawn against the accused qua offences punishable under Sections 148, 302 read with Section 149 IPC, thus the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to record a finding of conviction against the appellants-convicts. However, appellant Baljinder Singh @ Gogi was acquitted of the charges framed against him under Sections 307, 427, 506, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 149 IPC. Furthermore, appellant Guriqbal Singh @ Vicky Sekhon was also acquitted of the charges framed against him under Sections 427, 506 read with Section 149 IPC. The remaining accused were also ordered to be acquitted from all the charges framed against them.
3. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of even date, the learned trial Judge concerned, sentenced the convicts-appellants
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for conclusive and creditworthy evidence to support the charges against the accused, especially in cases involving eyewitness testi....
Vicarious liability of all members of an unlawful assembly for the commission of a fatal assault.
The court upheld the conviction for murder but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for extreme caution in imposing capital punishment.
The court applied exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC to determine the appropriate charges and convictions based on the nature of injuries and the circumstances of the incident.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the accused's exercise of the right of private defence.
The right to self-defense is limited by the necessity of proportionality and cannot be claimed when the defender has superior numbers and uses lethal force.
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
