Search Results for "quantum of sentence"

30 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 30 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in NDPS Case Due to Quantity Below Commercial Threshold. Appellant's Sentence Reduced from 10 to 6 Years for Possession of 6.300 kg Ganja Under Section 8(c) and 20(b) of NDPS Act.

The appellant, Issak Nabab Shah, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kopargaon, for offences under Section 8(c) and 20(b) of the Narcotic ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence of Appellant No.3 in Assault Case Due to Period Already Served and Incident Age. Sentence reduced to period already undergone and compensation reduced from Rs.25,000 to Rs.5,000 each for offences under Sections 308 and 326 IPC.

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by accused A1 to A3 in Sessions Case No. 20 of 2004, convicted under Sections 324, 326, and 308 read with Section 34...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentence for Rape and Murder of Minor Girl in POCSO Case. Conviction under Sections 302, 376(2)(f), 377, 363, 364, 367, 201 IPC and POCSO Act affirmed based on DNA evidence and circumstantial evidence.

The case pertains to the kidnapping, rape, unnatural sex, and murder of a 5-year-old girl by her neighbor, the appellant Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokad...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction of Bus Driver in Fatal Accident Case. Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts on rash and negligent driving causing death of four persons under Sections 279, 337, and 304-A IPC affirmed.

The appellant, Thangasamy, was convicted by the Trial Court for offences under Sections 279, 337 (3 counts), and 304-A (4 counts) of the Indian Penal ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Rash Driving Case: Sentences to Run Concurrently. The Court held that under Section 31 CrPC, it is mandatory to specify whether multiple sentences run concurrently or consecutively, and directed concurrent running of sentences under Sections 279 and 304A IPC.

The appellant, Gagan Kumar, was prosecuted and convicted by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar for offences under Sections 279 (rash driving...