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

1995 Supreme(SC) 347

M.M.PUNCHHI, K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY
B. H. Narasimharao – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of A. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT : - The appellant, who in the Courts below was described as A-3, is the lone one out of the eight, who stands convicted for offences punishable under Ss. 120-B, 409 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 5(1) (c) and 5(1) (d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, whereunder he has been variously sentenced as disclosed in the judgment under appeal. Out of the original arraigned accused, A-1, A-6, A-7 and A-8 were acquitted by the Trial Court whereas A-2, A-4 and A-5 were acquitted by the High Court. The conviction of the appellant was maintained by the High Court by recording the following finding :

"...Of course, in this case there is no direct evidence to prove that A-3 is a party to the conspiracy. It depends upon the circumstantial evidence. As already observed, there is no possibility of committing this fraud without the involvement of A-3 as he was the Head of this Section. The various omission on his part further support the view that he is a party to the conspiracy. If he were to be innocent, he would not have been silent spectator when T. Ts. which were received at the rate of one for every week in the first month and the amoun








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