Back
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
S. K. Agnihotri, J
Kashikant Jha – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and history of the criminal investigation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments regarding insufficiency of evidence for forgery conviction. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. arguments concerning sentencing limitations and statutory evidence presumptions. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. court establishes possession of forged documents as proof of manufacturing. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. defining forgery under section 463 ipc regarding intent and document falsification. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. modification of sentence for jurisdictional compliance and sentencing limits. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
ORDER
(20th June 2016)
S. K. Agnihotri, J
1. Questioning the legality and the validity of the judgment dated 05.02.2015 rendered in Criminal Appeal No.06 of 2014 by the Court of Sessions Judge, Special Division-II, at Gangtok, East Sikkim, the instant Criminal Revision Petition under Provisions of Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. is filed.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on a complaint made by one Mr. Madhav Sharma S/o o
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
