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

1960 Supreme(All) 192

V.G.OAK, KAILASH PRASAD
FAULAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.N.Katju, C.S.SARAN, D.Bahri

B. DAYAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application trade on behalf of Faulad and Kalloo on the 6th of October, 1960 stating that Criminal Appeal No. 233 of 1960 has been compromised between the parties and there-lore permission to compound the offence be granted.

( 2 ) THE facts, which have given rise to this application may be shortly stated. The applicants faulad and Kalloo were convicted by the iearnp. d Addl. Sessions Judge of Allahabad on the 30th of January, 1960 under Sections 308 and 397,. P. C. , and sentenced to different terms of imprisonment which it is not necessary to mention for the purpose of this application. Both the applicants appealed to this Court against their conviction which was heard by me on the 23rd september, 1960. I, after hearing the appeal, dictated judgment in open Court on that very date. As a result, I allowed the appeal of Kalloo and set him at liberty while I converted conviction of faulad into one under Section 325,. P. C. and under that section sentenced him to three years rule I, This judgment was not placed before me for signatures by the time this application was presented. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that a judgment p

















































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