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

2012 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 9

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
, J
Debasish Sarkar v. State of Tripura


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. P. Roy Barman
For the Respondents: Mr. R. C. Debnath

Table of Content
1. summary of facts leading to criminal conviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding evidence insufficiency. (Para 7 , 9 , 10)
3. legal implications of identification evidence. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
4. final ruling and implications of the conviction. (Para 23 , 24)

1. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 5-2-2004, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, in Criminal Appeal No. 17 (2) / 2001, confirming the conviction under S.323, IPC and 341, IPC, as rendered by the learned Court of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, West Tripura, Agartala, vide judgment dated 17/03/2001, passed in G.R. Case No. 288/1999. However, by the judgment dated 05/02/2004, the learned Sessions Judge modified the sentence of simple imprisonment for one year, as imposed by the learned trial Court to a sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of three months, under S.323, IPC. The learned trial Court had imposed sentence of simple imprisonment for a term of one month for the offence under S.341, IPC and the same was maintained.

2. At this stage, it would be appropriate to mention that the learned trial Court had convicted four accused


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