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

2004 Supreme(SC) 1032

P.P.NAOLEKAR, ARIJIT PASAYAT
State Of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Ikbal Hussen – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.-State of Rajasthan questions legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur holding that the trial against the respondent for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC ), could not be continued indefinitely. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gulabpura, Bhilwara, Rajasthan directed acquittal of the respondent who was facing trial for alleged commission of aforesaid offences. The alleged incident took place on 28th March, 1995. The trial court closed the evidence in the light of the decision of this Court in Raj Deo Sharma vs. State of Bihar (1998(7) SCC 507).

2. The High Court as noted above, observed that the trial cannot proceed indefinitely and the trial had not come to an end for a period of six years, and, therefore, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate was justified in closing the evidence and directing acquittal.

3. The correctness of the decisions in two Raj Deo Sharma s cases i.e. Raj Deo Sharma vs. State of Bihar (1998(7) SCC 507) and (1999(7) SCC 604) and that of "Common Cause" a Regi




































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