Mohd Nadim v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
Allahabad High Court affirmed the conviction of appellants for attempted murder but held the life sentence for Mohd. Nadim excessive, reducing it to ten years. Mohd. Haider's ten-year sentence was reduced to seven years. The court relied heavily on the testimony of the injured victim.
What did the court decide?
Mohd. Nadim's life sentence reduced to ten years rigorous imprisonment; Mohd. Haider's sentence reduced from ten to seven years rigorous imprisonment; fines maintained.
What the court decided
$~R-20 & 21.
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision: 16.04.2018 % CRL.A. 977/2013 MOHD NADIM ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jivesh Kumar Tiwari & Ms.Suman Chauhan, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State. % CRL.A. 632/2013 MOHD. HAIDER ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumer Sethi & Ms. Dolly Sharma, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. S. TEJI
VIPIN SANGHI, J. (ORAL)
- The aforesaid two appeals have been preferred by the appellants named above to assail their respective conviction by the Trial Court under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. The appellant Mohd. Nadim has also
Crl.A. Nos.977/2013 & 632/2013
Page 1 of 16
assailed his conviction under Section 25/ 27 of the Arms Act. Whereas the appellant Mohd. Nadim stands sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 307 IPC; he has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years for the offence under Section 25/ 27 of the Arms Act. His sentences are to run concurrently. The appellant Mohd. Haider has been sentenced to ten years Rigorous Imprisonment for the offence under Section 307 IPC with fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month. The benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. has been given to the appellant convicts.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the testimony of the injured victim PW-1 requires rejection due to lack of corroborative evidence like call records.
Whether the failure of the arresting officer to mention the place of arrest in the memo vitiates the conviction.
Whether the life sentence imposed on Mohd. Nadim and the ten-year sentence on Mohd. Haider are excessive and require reduction.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Mohd. Nadim
- appellant
Mohd. Haider
- respondent
State
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court