Anil v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
In this criminal appeal, the Court acquitted the appellant of an attempt to administer a stupefying drug due to lack of scientific evidence regarding the drink, while confirming his conviction for robbery, but reduced his sentence to the period already undergone.
What did the court decide?
Appellant acquitted of Sections 328/34 IPC; conviction under Sections 392/34 IPC confirmed; sentence reduced to time already undergone; appellant released from jail.
What the court decided
$~40
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- CRL.A. 478/2015 ANIL ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Naomi Chandra, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State with ASI Rajeev Kumar, P.S. Moti Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK O R D E R % 11.10.2018
- The appellant was convicted under Sections 328/392/34 IPC vide judgment dated 27th November, 2014, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years with fine of
5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one month under Sections 328/34 IPC; rigorous imprisonment of seven years with fine of5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one month under Sections 392/34 IPC.
- Aggrieved by his conviction and order on sentence dated 29th November, 2014 of the trial court, appellant has preferred this appeal. 3. Prosecution story, as unfolded, is that complainant-Subodh Singh arrived in the police station Moti Nagar on 09.08.2013 and made a statement that on 26.07.2013 two passengers boarded his battery rickshaw from Kirti Nagar Metro Station for Punjabi Bagh at about 2:30 PM. On the way,
passengers offered him Maaza (soft drink) and after drinking the same he became unconscious as the cold drink was laced with some intoxicating substance. Thereafter, the passengers took away his battery operated rickshaw, mobile phone and purse. On his this statement, FIR No. 286/13 under Sections 392/328/34 IPC was registered. During the investigation, discharge summary of the complainant was obtained from the hospital. The gastric lavage was collected from the hospital.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the prosecution proved the offence under Section 328 IPC of administering a stupefiant drug without scientific evidence.
Whether sentence should be reduced after successful appeal on one charge.
Whether the appellant is entitled to release on completion of arrears of sentence.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Anil
- respondent
State
Coram
A.K. Pathak
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court