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

2005 Supreme(SC) 233

P.P.NAOLEKAR, Y.K.SABHARWAL
PALANISAMY GOUNDER – Appellant
Versus
STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The challenge in this appeal is to a judgment and order passed by the High Court confirming the order of the Court of Session passed in exercise of power under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") adding the two appellants as Accused 4 and 5 in the sessions trial in a case under Section 302 and other provisions of the Penal Code. The incident, subject-matter of the case, took place on 8-3-2000. Initially charge-sheet was filed on 21-6-2000 against five accused including the present two appellants. Later, on the application of the Public Prosecutor, the appellants were dropped as accused in terms of the order of the Court of Session dated 10-92001 which was as a result of further investigation. It appears that on 24-12002 prosecution examined various witnesses including PWs 1, 2 and 3, said to be the witnesses of the incident. It was on the basis of their testimony that an application under Section 319 of the Code was filed by the Prosecutor seeking summoning of the appellants as accused along with the three accused who were facing trial. Later, a similar application was also filed by one of the prosecution witnesses. The 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