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

2004 Supreme(SC) 722

B.N.AGARWAL, H.K.SEMA
SATPAL – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


ORDER


1.Heard the parties.

2.Application for impleadment is allowed.

3. The sole appellant was convicted by the trial court under Section 302 of the Penal Code (for short "IPC") and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs 10,000, in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. On appeal being preferred, the High Court confirmed the conviction. Hence this appeal by special leave.

4. We have been taken through the first information report as well as evidence from which it appears that according to the prosecution case as well as evidence, no case under Section 302 IPC is made out, but at the highest, a case under Section 304-A IPC is disclosed. From the facts proved, it cannot be said that the accused had either intended to cause death of the victim or had knowledge that he was likely to cause death by such act. The evidence to prove a case of culpable homicide or murder is completely lacking. Merely because the victim was dashed by the vehicle which was being driven by the appellant, from that alone, neither a case of murder nor that of culpable homicide can be inferred. We are of the view that the facts alleged and proved show that a

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