REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Shailesh Appellant

V/S

STATE OF U. P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

VENCILPUSHPRAJ VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
RAJJU SON OF JAGVEER SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
TUKARAM AND ORS VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
B.N. KAVATAKAR AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
NISHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
MANJEET SINGH VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
KHOKAN@ KHOKHAN VISHWAS VS. STATE OF CHATTISGARH [REFERRED TO]
PINKOO @ JITENDRA VS. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
KALA SINGH @ GURNAM SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH ALIAS DAPINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF HIMACHALA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDER VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD GIASUDDIN VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
DEO NARAIN MANDAL VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
JAMEEL VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
VEERAN VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]
GURU BASAVARAJ ALIAS BENNE SETTAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
KRISHAN VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
SUMER SINGH VS. SURAJBHAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. BAWA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAJ BALA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
RAVADA SASIKALA VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
ANVERSINH @ KIRANSINH FATESINH ZALA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
PARDESHIRAM VS. STATE OF M.P.(NOW CHHATTISGARH) [REFERRED TO]
PRAVAT CHANDRA MOHANTY VS. STATE OF ODISHA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Heard Sri Siya Ram Pandey, learned counsel for appellants and Sri Vikas Goswami, learned counsel for State.

(2.) This appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellants against the judgment and order dtd. 4/5/2017, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Hapur in Sessions Trial No.71 of 2016 (State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shailesh and others) arising out of Case Crime No.328 of 2015 convicting the accused - appellants under Ss. 302 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in brevity 'IPC'), Police Station Gardhmukteshwar, District Hapur and sentenced the accusedappellants to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5,000.00 and in case of default of payment of fine, further to undergo imprisonment for a period of one month.

(3.) The facts of the present case are that on 31/7/2015, while the informant and his father Babu Ram( deceased) were returning home after closing their tea shop, they were intercepted by accused - appellant-Raju, who asked them to pay Rs.150.00for the grocery items which were purchased by the deceased earlier. The accused- appellant Raju was told that the amount will be paid the next day, hearing which he got annoyed and abused the complainant-Sanjay, son of the deceased and his father ( deceased). At this stage, while the complainant -Sanjay and the deceased were proceeding on their way, the accused- appellants surrounded them. The accused- appellants then started beating and kicking the deceased, till he breath his last. After killing the deceased, the accused- appellants fled away. Pursuant to this an FIR, Case Crime No.202 of 2015 was registered by the complainant-Sanjay against the accused- appellants, under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of IPC. Consequently, the accusedappellants were arrested.

Click here to view full judgment.

SHAILESH Vs. STATE OF U. P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address