Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SURYA PARTAP SINGH
Kuldeep @ Pinku – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.
1. Challenge in this Revision Petition is to the judgment dated 18.05.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Sonipat, hereinafter being referred to as ‘Appellate Court’ only. By virtue of above-mentioned judgment, the learned Appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction dated 01.12.2010 and order of sentence dated 02.12.2010, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Sonipat, hereinafter being referred to as ‘trial Court’.
2. By virtue of above-mentioned judgment, the petitioner, who was facing a trial for the commission of offence punishable under Section-25 of Arms Act has been held guilty for the commission of above-mentioned offence, and the learned trial Court awarded following sentence to the petitioner:-
| Offence(s) under Section | Imprisonment | Fine | In default of payment of fine |
|---|---|---|---|
| 25 of Arms Act | RI for 01 year | Rs. 200/- | SI for 15 days |
3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned judgments, passed by the learned trial Court as well as learned Appellate Court are outcome of conjectures and surmises and therefore, both of them deserve to be set aside.
4. The pith and substance of the story put up b
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; failure to adhere to legal standards and evidentiary requirements can result in acquittal.
Manufacture, sale of prohibited arms and ammunition - Conviction confirmed - As per Section 3(1) no person shall acquire, have in his possession, or carry any firearm or ammunition unless he holds a ....
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and fair and impartial investigation is essential for reliable prosecution.
The prosecution's failure to prove seizure of arms and lack of valid sanction for prosecution under the Arms Act results in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
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....
Conviction under the Arms Act requires independent corroboration of evidence, especially from police witnesses; the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for independent witnesses and corroborating evidence in cases involving the recovery of weapons and confessional statements made in....
The prosecution must prove unlawful possession of firearms beyond reasonable doubt, and minor inconsistencies in witness testimonies do not undermine the case if the overall evidence is credible.
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
