Back
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J
Sunder Mahto @ Dukhan Mahto – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the conviction for impersonation and its penalties under ipc. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments from both sides regarding the evidence and intent. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observations on trial evidence and required intent. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. final decisions on convictions and implications of found evidence. (Para 8) |
1. The instant Criminal Revision is directed against the order dated 14.05.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo at Tenughat in Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 2009 affirming the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.05.2009 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bermo at Tenughat in Complaint Case No. 01 of 2007 whereby and whereunder petitioner was held guilty for the offence under Section 419 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 419 IPC and RI for two years under Section 193 IPC, both sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. Factual matrix of the case is that complaint case no. 01 of 2007 was lodged by Mr. M.K. Tripathy, learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bermo at Tenughat before the learned Additional Chief Judicial
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
