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

1978 Supreme(Sikk) 9

A.M.BHATTACHARJEE
RAJ KUMAR RAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

1. The accused-appellant has been convicted on his own plea of guilty to a charge under S. 25 (1) of the Arms Act, 1959, which has been extended to Sikkim by the President by a notification under the provisions of Cl. (n) of Art.371F of the Constitution of India on 16th May, 1975, and enforced on 1st Aug., 1976. The charge was that the accused on or about 19th Feb.. 1978, had in his possession a revolver and one live cartridge without any licence therefor and the accused has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2. If the Arms Act, 1959, is validly operative in Sikkim as a result of its extension to and enforcement in Sikkim under the provisions of Art. 371F (n) of the Constitution, then the conviction must be maintained and the appeal must be dismissed as there is and can be no other challenge to the conviction in this case.

3. Under S. 412 of Cr. P. C., 1898, which is still now the law relating to Criminal Procedure in Sikkim, if an accused person has pleaded guilty and has been convicted on such plea, there shall be no appeal except as to the extent or legality of the sentence except where the conviction is made by a Magistrate of the Second or the












































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