KHURSHID AHMAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (AT: NAINITAL)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Mr. Manoj Sah, Advocate who was earlier appointed as Amicus Curiae, was not present in the Court when appeal was taken up for hearing in pre lunch session. Therefore, Narayan Har Gupta, Advocate present in the Court was requested to appear as Amicus Curiae in the present case. Mr. Narayan Har Gupta, Advocate agreed to argue this appeal in post lunch session. Copy of the paper book was handed over to him.
(2.) Appeal was taken up for hearing in post lunch session.
(3.) Present appeal was received through Jail Authority assailing the judgment and order dated 18.02.2011 passed by Sessions Judge, Almora in Session Trial No. 1 of 2010, whereby appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 304 Part II, 394 and 411 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years under Section 304 Part II I.P.C.; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/, and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo additional simple imprisonment of six months under Section 394 I.P.C.; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 411 I.P.C with the stipulation that all the sentences shall run concurrently.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.