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

1998 Supreme(SC) 1055

M.K.MUKHERJEE, M.SRINIVASAN
Roopa Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


(1) LEAVE granted limited to the nature of offence. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2) THE appellant and two others were tried for committing the murder of one Naba in furtherance of their common intention. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302. I. P. C. (simpliciter) and acquitted the other two. As the appeal preferred by him in the High court proved abortive, he has filed the instant appeal.

(3) IN absence of any conclusive evidence adduced by the prosecution to prove that the injury inflicted by the appellant resulted in the death of the victim, the appellant could not be-in view of the acquittal of the other two against whom the allegation was that they also inflicted injuries on the deceased - convicted under Section 302, I. P. C. (simpliciter) as he would be liable only for his own act, which in the instant case was of causing a grievous injury on the head of the deceased by a kudali (a sharp cutting instrument). The offence committed by the appellant will, therefore, come squarely under Section 326, Indian Penal Code. We accordingly set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 302, I. P. C. and co

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