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

1986 Supreme(SC) 188

A.P.SEN, S.NATARAJAN
Chaganti Satyanarayana – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
A.SUBBA RAO, P.RAM REDDY, S.Madhusudan Rao, T.V.S.N.Chari, VRINDA GROVER

JUDGMENT

NATARAJAN, J. :— This appeal by special leave against an order of a learned single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in a petition filed under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) calls for a critical examination of the scope and effect of proviso (a) to Section 167(2) of the Code. Several High Courts have rendered decisions construing differently the terms of the proviso but a need for the examination of the terms of the proviso by this Court had not arisen till now.

2. The circumstances which form the prefatory for this appeal can be summarised as under.

The hamlet of Madigawada in Village Karamchedu in Andhra Pradesh was the scene of a horrendous riot on the morning of July 17, 1985. The riot culminated in a toll of human lives and huge destruction of property. Five persons were left dead, twenty others were victims of injuries of varying degrees, properties were looted and hutments were damaged or destroyed.

3. In connection with the macabre events the police authorities arrested 94 persons including the appellants herein and had them remanded to custody. The appellants were arrested in the forenoon of July 19, 1985 a








































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