VIKRAMJIT SINGHVICKY Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed against the impugned verdict, as made on 20/10/2018, upon Sessions Case No. 182 of 27/7/2011, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby in respect of charges drawn against the accused qua offences punishable under Ss. 302, 307 of the IPC, and, under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to record a finding of conviction against accused-appellant Vikramjit Singh @ Vicky. However, the other coaccused, namely, Gurpreet Singh, was ordered to be acquitted of the charges framed against him qua the offences (supra). Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of even date, the learned trial Judge concerned, sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, for an offence punishable under Sec. 302 IPC, besides also imposed, upon the convict sentence of fine, as comprised in a sum of Rs.20,000.00, and, in default of payment of fine amount, he sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. Moreover, the learned convicting Court also sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years, for an offence punishable under Sec. 307 of the IPC, and, also imposed, upon him the sentence of fine, as comprised in a sum of Rs.20,000.00, besides in default of payment of fine amount, it sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. Further, the learned trial Judge concerned, also sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, for an offence punishable under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, and, also imposed, upon him the sentence of fine, as comprised in a sum of Rs.10,000.00, besides in default of payment of fine amount, he sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) All the above imposed sentences of imprisonment, were ordered to run concurrently but the period of detention undergone by the convict, during the investigations, and, trial of the case, was, in terms of Sec. 428 of the Cr.P.C., rather ordered to be set off from the above imposed sentence(s) of imprisonment. Further, as per the provisions of Sec. 357 of the Cr.P.C., the injured and the LRs of the deceased were granted compensation of Rs.10,000.00 each, and, the same amount was ordered to be paid out of the fine imposed upon the convict.

(3.) The accused-convict becomes aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, besides also, becomes aggrieved from the consequent therewith sentence(s) of imprisonment, and, of fine as became imposed, upon him, by the learned convicting Court concerned, and, hence has chosen to institute thereagainst the instant criminal appeal, before this Court. Factual Background