9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against conviction and sentence u/s 307 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, consecutive sentencing, consideration of extenuating circumstances, previous criminal record, age of the appellant at the time of the offence.
Summary: Issue 1: Conviction and Sentence The appellant filed an appeal against the final judgment convicting him u/s 307 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The trial court sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment and fines for each offence, ordering the sentences to run consecutively. The High Court upheld the conviction and sentence, noting the seriousness of the offences committed in the court premises. Issue 2: Grounds of Appeal The appellant contended that the consecutive sentences awarded were disproportionate and contrary to the law. He argued that the sentences for offences under a single transaction should run concurrently, citing legal precedents to support his case. Issue 3: Justification of Sentence The respondent argued that the High Court rightly upheld the sentence imposed by the trial court, considering the evidence on record. The basis for the consecutive sentencing was the appellant's previous criminal record for a similar offence in the court premises. Judgment: After considering the arguments, the Supreme Court modified the sentence, holding that the sentences for different offences must run concurrently, not consecutively. The Court emphasized the appellant's age at the time of the offence and the extenuating circumstances. The sentence was reduced to a total of 10 years, which the appellant must serve. The appeal was partly allowed in favor of the appellant.
|
