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

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Hunny @ Kakku – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Seema Sharma,Advocate General

(Indore Dt.03.3.2020)

Per Shailendra Shukla, J:-

The present reference and appeal arise out of judgment

dated 30.9.2019, pronounced in Special Case No.2147/2018

by the 15th A.S.J. and Special Judge, Indore whereby,

--2-- CRRFC No.12/2019 & CRA. No.8818/2019

appellant – Honey @ Kakku has been convicted for the

offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376AB, 302,

201, 376A of IPC and under Section 5(n) read with Section 6

of POCSO Act. The accused has not been sentenced

separately under Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of POCSO

Act, in view of Section 42 of POCSO Act which provides for

sentencing under the provisions of IPC, if such provision

provides for stiffer sentence and therefore was sentenced

under Section 376AB in place of Section 5(n) read with

Section (6) of POCSO Act. Ultimately, the appellant has been

sentenced under various provisions as under :-

Provision of IPC

Sentence

Section 363 IPC

5 years RI with fine of Rs.2000/-. In default

of payment of fine 2 months additional RI.

Section 366 of IPC 7 years RI with fine of Rs.3000/-. In default

of payment of

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