RAJ TILAK Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIBHU BAKHRU, J 1. The appellants have impugned a judgment dated 21.07.2016, whereby the appellants were convicted of offences punishable under section 323, 354, 354A, 356, 394, 450, 452, 506 (Part II) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). In addition, the appellant Vinay was also convicted of an offence punishable under Section 411 of the IPC. The appellants also impugn an order on sentence dated 25.07.2016, whereby the appellants were sentenced in respect of the offences committed by them.

(2.) A tabular statement indicating the sentences awarded to the appellants in respect of the offences for which they were convicted is set out below: - <IMG>JUDGEMENT_3_LAWS(DLH)1_2021_1.JPG</IMG> <IMG>JUDGEMENT_3_LAWS(DLH)1_2021_2.JPG</IMG>

(3.) In addition to the above, the appellant Vinay was also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year with a fine of ?1,000/- and in the event of default in payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 30 days for committing an offence punishable under Section 411 of the IPC. All the sentences awarded to appellants were directed to run concurrently.