Welcome back to Caseon!
Log in today and discover expertly curated legal audios and how our AI-powered, tailor-made responses can empower you to navigate the complexities of your case.
Stay ahead of the curve—don’t miss out on the insights that could transform your legal practice!
Sonia [A-1] and Sanjiv [A-2], respondents in Criminal
Appeal No. 895 of 2005, were tried and convicted by the trial
court under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section
120-B of the
...Indian Penal Code [‘IPC’ for short] and sentenced
to death and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each. A-1 and A-2
were further convicted under Sections 25(1-B)(b) and 25(1-B(a)
of the Arms Act respectively and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. A-2 was
further convicted under Section 201 IPC and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a
fine of Rs. 1000/- in default whereof to further undergo
imprisonment for one month. The sentences were, however,
ordered to run concurrently. Tried along with A-1 and A-2
were eight other accused persons but they were acquitted by
the trial court for want of evidence. The order of convictions
and sentences gave rise to a murder reference by the Sessions
Judge, Hisar and appeals by both the accused before the
Punjab & Haryana High Court. By the impugned judgment,
while upholding their convictions under Section 302 read with
Section 34 and Section 120-B of the IPC and other provisions,
the High Court has commuted the sentence of death into life
imprisonment.
Legal Notes
Add a Note....