Sikkim High Court
Crl. A./8/2022 of NIMA SHERPA @ NANI KO BAU Vs STATE OF SIKKIM on 17 June 2024
COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK (Criminal Appeal Jurisdiction) Dated : 17th June, 2024 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DIVISION BENCH : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, JUDGE
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
(Criminal Appeal Jurisdiction)
Dated : 17[th] June, 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DIVISION BENCH : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, JUDGE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Crl. A. No.07 of 2022
Appellant :Karan Chettri
versus
:State of Sikkim
Respondent
Application under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance Ms. Puja Lamichaney, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel) for the Appellant.
Mr. S. K. Chettri, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-Respondent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
and
Crl. A. No.08 of 2022
:Nima Sherpa @ Nani Ko Bau
Appellant
versus
Respondent :State of Sikkim
Application under Section 374(2) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance Mr. S. S. Hamal, Senior Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel) with Mr. Tashi Wongdi Bhutia, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel) for the Appellant.
Mr. S. K. Chettri, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-Respondent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER ON SENTENCE
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties on Sentence.
2. Learned Counsel for the Convicts/Appellants verbally submit that a lenient view be taken in the sentencing in view of the fact that the Convicts are in their early twenties and that, only the ds/sdl minimum sentence be imposed and not the one extending to life imprisonment.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor had no submissions to advance except to state that this Court correctly observed in its Judgment that the minimum imprisonment to be imposed under Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, the “IPC”), is twenty years.
4. After hearing submissions of Learned Counsel for the parties, in view of the mandate of law a sentence of rigorous imprisonment of twenty years, each, is imposed on each of the Convicts (i.e., Karan Chettri in Crl.A. No.07 of 2022 and Nima Sherpa @ Nani Ko Bau in Crl.A. No.08 of 2022) under Section 376D of the IPC, with a fine of ₹ 5,000/-(Rupees five thousand) only, each. In default of payment of fine, each of the Convicts shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month. 5.Appeal disposed of accordingly.
6. A copy of this Order be made over to each of the convicts through the Jail Superintendent, Central Prison, Rongyek.
7. Copy of this Order be forwarded to the Learned Trial Court for information along with its records.
8. Copy of this Order also be forwarded to the Jail Authority at the Central Prison, Rongyek, for information and necessary steps.
( Bhaskar Raj Pradhan ) ( Meenakshi Madan Rai ) Judge Judge 17-06-2024 17-06-2024 Approved for reporting : Yes