HARI OM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
LAWS(SC)-2014-10-62
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on
October 31,2014
HARI OM
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
HEM CHAND VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. M V MANJUNATHEGOWDA [REFERRED TO]
G V SIDDARAMESH VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
BHAGWAN SINGH & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2018-9-119] [REFERRED TO]DEV PRAKASH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-2-279] [REFERRED TO]
BANWARI & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-384] [REFERRED]
TALEWAR VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-1-79] [REFERRED TO]
BIJENDAR SINGH SON OF CHIDDU SINGH AND OTHERS VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH P.P. [LAWS(RAJ)-2017-4-182] [REFERRED TO]
BABU LAL SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-3-302] [REFERRED TO]
SALAUDDIN ALIAS BUDDHU AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2016-6-40] [REFERRED]
AHSAN AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2018-11-116] [REFERRED TO]
CHOPDE VISHAL VS. THEJ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR [LAWS(TLNG)-2022-12-98] [REFERRED TO]
BADAM SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-10-246] [REFERRED TO]
RANGANATHA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2015-11-339] [REFERRED TO]
YERRABALLI CHINNA SUBBAIAH VS. STATE OF A.P., REPTD. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HYDERABAD. [LAWS(APH)-2018-6-90] [REFERRED TO]
SUSTI PADA MANDAL VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2021-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
NARESH KUMAR SAINI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH P.P. [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-2-261] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. SHABBIR AND ANR. VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-9-171] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. -
(1.)This Criminal Appeal is filed by the accused, Hari Om (A -1), against the judgment and order dated
14.05.2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal no. 190 -DB of
2004, which in turn, arises out of judgment dated 31.01.2004/04.02.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jind in Session Case no. 57/23.12.2002
and Session Trial No. 5 of 13.02.2003.
(2.)By impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant (A -1) and upheld his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 304 -B and 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "IPC") and allowed the appeals filed by the co -accused namely, Subhash, Dharam Pal, Ram Chander and Chander Kala (A -2 to A -5) and set aside their conviction and sentence.
(3.)So far as this appeal is concerned, we are only concerned with the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant - Hari Om (A -1).
(2.)By impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant (A -1) and upheld his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 304 -B and 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "IPC") and allowed the appeals filed by the co -accused namely, Subhash, Dharam Pal, Ram Chander and Chander Kala (A -2 to A -5) and set aside their conviction and sentence.
(3.)So far as this appeal is concerned, we are only concerned with the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant - Hari Om (A -1).
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.