SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 386

N.S.HEGDE, B.P.SINGH
Ramesh Singh @ Photti – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Santosh Hegde, J.-The appellants in these appeals were accused 2 and 3 before the 2nd Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in S.C. No. 178/99. The said Sessions Judge found the appellants and A-1 guilty of an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life. Against the said conviction and sentence, all the accused preferred an appeal before the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad which having been dismissed, the two appellants who were accused 2 and 3 have challenged the said judgment of the High Court, while accused No.1 has not challenged the said judgment and conviction.

2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are follows:

The deceased S. Mahendara Singh was residing with his mother PW-2 and elder brother PW-1 at Bapunagar within the limits of Sanjeevareddy Nagar Police Station. The appellants and A-1 were also residents of said Bapunagar. The residents of Bapunagar were managing an Association called Basthi Youth Association which in turn was running a Bhajana Mandali. PW- 4 was the President of the said Bhajana Mandali and the deceased was the Vice Preside






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top