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

1981 Supreme(SC) 53

S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, A.V.VARADARAJAN
Mohammad Akbar Dar – Appellant
Versus
State Of J & K – Respondent


Judgment

FAZAL ALI, J.:- This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court dated the 7th May, 1979.

2. The main grievance of the appellants is that the High Court erred in law in not fully considering the effect of the documents produced by the prosecution and the statements recorded under Section 161, Cr. P. C. before finding that there were sufficient grounds for framing charges against them. A similar criticism was made by the appellants in respect of the judgment of the Special Judge also.

3. We have heard counsel for the appellants and have gone through the judgments of the courts below. Both, the trial and the High Court have generally given a brief survey of the evidence sought to be adduced against the appellants. It true that the High Court has not gone into the details or the pros and cons of the matter. This was obviously because that is not the stage when the Court could enter into meticulous consideration of the evidence and materials. The High Court has clearly observed that after perusing the statement of the witnesses recorded under S. 161, it was unable to find that the charges could be said to be groundless.

4. We do not fin


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