CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 11 P&H CK 0006

Inderjit @ Inder and Others vs The State of UT Chandigarh

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 18 November 2010 · Citation: (2011) 1 RCR(Civil) 234 : (2011) 1 RCR(Criminal) 234

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sabina, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 2248 SB of 2010 (O and M)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 334 words

Sabina, J.—The appellate were convicted for an offence u/s 148, 307, 323 and 325 IPC read with Section 149 IPC by the Additional Session Judge vide judgment dated 23.07.2010. Vide order dated 24.7.2010, the Appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each u/s 148 IPC rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 year and fine of Rs. 1000/-each u/s 307 read with Section 149 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months u/s 323 read with Section 149 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/- each u/s 325 read with Section 149 IPC. Hence the present appeal.

2.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that now with the intervention of relatives and friends, the parties have arrived at a compromise. Laxman-complaint (PW-4) had not sported prosecution case during the trial and was declared hostile, injured Ramesh has arrived at compromise with the Appellants and has no objection, if the sentence qua imprisonment of the Appellants is reduced to already under gone by them.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Appellants has not challenged the conviction of the Appellants u/s 148, 307, 323 and 325 read with Section 149 IPC but has submitted that sentence qua imprisonment of the Appellants be reduced to already undergone by them.

4.

Ramesh injured (PW-3) is present in person along with his counsel and has admitted the factum of compromise between the parties and the contents of his affidavit on record. Injured Ramesh had further stated that he has no objection if the sentence qua imprisonment of the Appellant is reduced to already undergone.

5.

According, the conviction of the Appellants under Sections 148, 307, 323, 325/149 IPC is maintained however, the sentence qua imprisonment of the Appellants is reduced to already undergone by them. The Appellants, who are in custody be released forthwith, if they are not required in any other, case subject to deposit of fine if not already deposited.

Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.