Brajesh Kumar @ Rahul vs The State Of Bihar on 20 July, 2026

    0
    6
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

    Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Despite service of

    SPONSORED

    notice, the informant/respondent no.2 has chosen not to enter his

    appearance.

    2. The sole appellant in this case is seeking

    suspension of his sentence and release on bail during pendency

    of the appeal.

    3. The appellant has been convicted vide judgment

    dated 31.07.2024 and sentenced vide order dated 08.08.2024 by

    the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Patna in connection
    Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1276 of 2024(16) dt.20-07-2026

    with Sessions Trial No.168 of 2009, CIS No. 836 of 2014,

    arising out of Rajiv Nagar P.S. Case No.112 of 2008 for the

    offences punishable under Section 376(1) and 368 of the Indian

    Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and has been ordered to undergo

    rigorous imprisonment for a period of 12 years and to pay a fine

    of Rs.30,000/- under Section 376(1) of the I.P.C. and in default

    of payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo

    imprisonment for further period of 6 months. He has been

    further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period

    of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 368 of

    the I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, he has been ordered

    to undergo imprisonment for further period of 3 months. All the

    sentences have been directed to run concurrently.



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here