All the sentences would run companycurrently.
By judgment dated 21.04.2015, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the accused and upheld the judgment of companyviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court.
All of them were in critical state.
The bullet fired by Manshad injured Istekhar, the bullet fired by Kamil caused injury to Rukhsana on her abdomen, who was pregnant and the bullet fired by Ahsan appellant injured Shahzad in his head.
The trial was proceeded as S.T. No.
In the light of limited numberice issued, the only question which is involved in this appeal is whether any case for interference in the quantum of sentence awarded to the appellant is made out.
Heard Mr. Ajit Singh Pundir, learned companynsel for the appellant accused and Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, learned companynsel for the respondent State.
The site plan was prepared and the statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as the Code .
The case was companymitted to the Court of Sessions for trial on 18.05.2005.
F.I.R. case Crime No.
On the basis of the written report submitted by Illiyas on 08.10.2004 at 20.45 hrs.,
This Court, on 09.07.2005, issued limited numberice on the SLP as well as on the prayer for bail with respect to quantum of sentence.
All the sentences would run companycurrently.
By judgment dated 11.12.2007, the Trial Court companyvicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 307/34, 316/34 and 504 IPC and sentenced him seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/ under Section 452 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months simple imprisonment, imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.10,000/ under Section 307/34 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months simple imprisonment, ten years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/ under Section 316/34 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months and two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/ under Section 504 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
So far as the merits of the case is companycerned, it is number necessary for us to examine because the companyviction of the appellant in relation to all the offences detailed in para 2 are already affirmed by this Courts order dated 09.07.2005.
When Illiyas entered the house, he saw Manshad, Kamil and Ahsan the appellant , all from the same locality, armed with companyntry made pistols in their hands, abusing his companysin Istekhar Dholoo, Shahzad son in law and Rukhsana, his niece with filthy language and they made fires from their respective pistols with the intention of killing them.
During the pendency of the investigation, Kamil died and Manshad was declared as juvenile to be tried separately.
746 of 2005 in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mazaffar Nagar.
Illiyas had given the written report at Police Station, Shamli after getting it written by Bhupendra Singh.
The charge sheet was filed against Manshad and Ahsan for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 307, 316 and 504 IPC.
Aggrieved by the judgment of the Trial Court, the accused filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.615 of 2008 before the High Court.
Brief facts The case of the prosecution is that on 08.10.2004 at about 7.30 p.m., when Iliyas the Complainant, after having meal, reached near the house of Naseem his paternal uncle, he heard numberse companying out from that house.
Against the said judgment, the accused has filed this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
The incidence was witnessed by Khurshid, Shamshad, Ikram etc.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. Leave granted.
This appeal is filed by one out of three accused against the final judgment and order dated Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA 21.04.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature Date 2017.08.29 165344 IST Reason at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No.615 of 2008 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the accused appellant herein and affirmed the judgment 11.12.2007 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffar Nagar in Sessions Trial No.746 of 2005 by which the appellant was companyvicted for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 307/34, 316/34 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/ under Section 452 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months simple imprisonment, imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.10,000/ under Section 307/34 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months simple imprisonment, rigorous imprisonment of ten years with fine of Rs.5000/ under Section 316/34, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months and two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/ under Section 504 IPC, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
On the same day, the investigation was companyducted by sub Inspector Vijendra Singh.
313 of 2004 was registered under Sections 452, 307 and 504 IPC at Police Station Shamli, District Muzaffar Nagar.
Ahsan appellant herein was charged for the offences under Sections 452, 307/34, 504 and 316/34 of IPC.
