KULAI IBRAHIM Vs. STATE
LAWS(SC)-2014-7-25
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADRAS)
Decided on July 03,2014

Kulai Ibrahim Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KETANKUMAR GOPALBHAI TANDEL V. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
PAWAN VS. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL [REFERRED TO]
AKBAR SHEIKH VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
JITENDRA SINGH ALIAS BABBOO SINGH VS. STATE OF UP [REFERRED TO]
ASHWANI KUMAR SAXENA VS. STATE OF M.P. [REFERRED TO]
ABUZAR HOSSAIN ALIAS GULAM HOSSAIN VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

KRIPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-421] [REFERRED TO]
SHER SINGH @ SHERU VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-9-6] [REFERRED]
MUKESH KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2024-1-47] [REFERRED TO]
GITIKA SAHU VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2014-8-23] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. ASHOK MUNNA RAI [LAWS(BOM)-2015-4-319] [REFERRED TO]
NAKUL TURI VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2023-11-47] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. SALMAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2023-3-158] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY YADAV VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2020-2-56] [REFERRED TO]
DEBABRATA SAHOO @ MITHUN @ DEBAPRASAD SAHOO VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2020-7-10] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-1-32] [REFERRED TO]
LEENA KATIYAR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-5-393] [REFERRED TO]
JAI PRAKASH TIWARI VS. STATE OF U P & ANOTHER [LAWS(ALL)-2016-9-195] [REFERRED]
SIDDU VS. THE STATE [LAWS(KAR)-2016-4-91] [REFERRED TO]
MAYA SINGH & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2016-8-179] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)In this special leave petition, judgment and order dated 15/10/2004 passed by the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal No.963 of 2001 is under challenge.
(3.)The appellant along with others was tried by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Coimbatore for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code ("the IPC"). The Sessions Court convicted the appellant and 2 others for offence punishable under Section 148 of the IPC and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month each. The Sessions Court also convicted each of them for offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life. The appellant along with the other 2 accused preferred an appeal to the High Court. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court dismissed the said appeal. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeal, the appellant has approached this Court.
In the petition, there is no challenge to the conviction and sentence on merits. The only point raised is that the appellant was a juvenile when the offence was committed and, hence, he cannot be convicted. However, in the interest of justice, we have carefully perused the impugned judgment and the relevant record. We are of the considered opinion that the order of conviction and sentence is perfectly legal.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.