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

1995 Supreme(SC) 86

K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY, M.M.PUNCHHI
Mangoo – Appellant
Versus
State Of M. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

 This is an appeal under Section 2-A of the SC (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. Mangoo, original accused No.1 and Hanumant Singh, original accused No.3 are the appellants. They along with 2 others - Baldeo Singh (A-2) and Sardar Singh alias Daulatawala (A-4) were tried for offence under Sections 302 and 302 read with Section 34, IPC. The case mainly rested on the evidence of Dev Dutta (PW.2), a boy aged about 16 years and son of the deceased Pooranlal. The trial Court acquitted all the four accused holding that the evidence of the sole witness namely PW.2 was not wholly reliable. The learned trial Judge discarded his evidence on the ground that the medical evidence is in conflict and that there is possibility of the witness having been tutored and that there are certain discrepancies in material particulars in his evidence.

2. The State preferred an appeal and the High Court having examined PW.2s evidence in the light of surrounding circumstances carefully considered all the reasons given by the trial Court and held that the reasoning given by the trial Court is wholly unsound and allowed the appeal convicting all the four accused. It is stated th






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