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

1983 Supreme(SC) 175

D.A.DESAI, O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY
Rana Partap – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
A.MINOCHA, A.N.Mulla, K.G.Bhagat, R.L.Kohli, R.N.Poddar

Judgment

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:- Rana Partap, Manmohan alias Pappi and Sat Pal were tried by the learned Sessions Judge-Karnal-Manmohan for an offence under S. 302 I.P.C. and Rana Partap and Sat Pal for an offence under S. 302 read with S. 34 I.P.C. They were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, but on appeal by the State, the order of acquittal was reversed and they were convicted under S. 302 and S. 302 read with S. 34 and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. They have preferred this appeal under the SC Enlargement of Jurisdiction (Criminal) Act.

2. Shri A. N. Mulla and Shri Kohli, learned counsel for the appellants read to us, in extenso, the evidence of all the material witnesses as also the judgments of the learned Sessions Judge and the High Court. They also addressed to us elaborate arguments. We are satisfied that the High Court did not overstep the bounds of their jurisdiction or sidestep the principles to be observed in dealing with appeals against orders of acquittal. We are also satisfied that the learned Sessions Judge was patently in error in acquitting the accused and that he entertained doubts where none existed. The High Court was quite right in reversing the












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