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

1996 Supreme(SC) 104

G.N.RAY, K.VENKATASWAMI
State Of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Haripal Singh – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. It appears that the appeal was preferred by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the order of acquittal dated 24-5-1989 passed by the Special Sessions Judge, Pilibhit in Case No. 153 of 1986. The said sessions case was filed against the respondent-accused under Section 302 read with Sections 307 and 34 IPC. The leave application was dismissed summarily without indicating any reason and the consequential order of dismissal of appeal was also passed without indicating any reason. It is really unfortunate that the appeal was disposed of without giving any reason whatsoever. On 26-4-1988, against a similar order of dismissal in limine passed by the Allahabad High Court in State of U.P v. Jagdish Singh (Crl. A. No. 291 of 1988, SLP (Cri) No. 3459 of 1989) (an appeal) was moved before this Court and a three Judges Bench of this Court deprecated such order disposing of the appeal without giving any reason. Unfortunately, a similar improper order has been passed in this case. To say the least, it is a sorry state of affairs. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside the order of dismissal of the appeal in limine and send the matter back to the High Court with a d

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