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

2025 Supreme(All) 2887

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA
Dault Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Sandeep Kumar Dubey, Kundan Singh

JUDGMENT :

Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.

1. Heard Shri Sandeep Kumar Dubey, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing on behalf of the appellants, Shri O.P. Dwivedi, learned AGA-Ist, for the State and perused the record.

2. By means of this criminal appeal, the appellants have challenged their conviction under Sections 302 , 302/34, 323/34 of IPC, whereas appellant Daulat Ram and Makrand alias Mukandi have been convicted under Sections 307 /34, 307 and 323 IPC. Both the appellants have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Sections 302 , 302/34 IPC and 5 years RI for the charge under Section 307 /34 and 307 IPC respectively and 6 months RI for the charge under Section 302 IPC. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

3. In Surya Baksh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh , (2014) 14 SCC 222 , the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that it is always not necessary to adjourn the matter in case both appellants or his counsels/lawyers are absent and the Court can decide the appeal on merits after perusal of the record and the judgement of the trial Court. It has further been observed that if the case is decided on merits in the absence of the appellant, the higher court can remedy th

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