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

1990 Supreme(SC) 525

M.M.PUNCHHI, R.M.SAHAI
Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
ARUNESHVAR GUPTA, B.D.SHARMA, N.H.Hingorani, RAVI P.VADHVANI, S.K.JAIN, U.R.Lalit

Judgment

R. M. SAHAI, J.:- In this appeal, by grant of special leave under Article 136 of Constitution of India, the short question that arises for consideration is if the High Court committed any error of law in exercise of its powers under Section 378 read with Section 386(l)(a) of the Cr. P.C. in allowing the appeal against acquittal and convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment.

2. Law is well settled. While caution is the watchword in appeal against acquittal as the trial Judge has occasion to watch demeanour of witnesses and interference should not be made merely because a different conclusion could have been arrived, the provision does not inhibit any restriction or limitation. Prudence demands restraint on mere probability or possibility but in perversity or misreading interference is imperative other wise existence of power shall be rendered meaningless.

3. Time and place of unnatural death, of Asha Rani, by burning, at her in laws small house with at least six inmates, could not and was not disputed. Both the trial Judge and the High Court held that the prosecution succeeded in proving this. It was fur














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