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

2007 Supreme(SC) 1000

ARIJIT PASAYAT, P.P.NAOLEKAR
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Karim – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.—

1.The State of U.P. has filed this appeal against the judgment passed by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court directing acquittal of the three respondents (hereinafter referred to as the ‘A-1, A-2 and A-3’) respectively.

2.The accused persons were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’) by the IVth Additional and Sessions Judge, Bareilly in Sessions Trial No. 359/78.

3.Background facts in a nutshell are as follows :

“The first information report (Ex. Ka. 1) was to the effect that Buddhi was the husband of the complainant (PW-1) whereas A-1, Abdul Karim was his elder brother. He was indebted to some Punjabi, and hence had mortgaged his house and 1= bigha agricultural land with him and abandoning the village 20 years back had gone to Baheri and settled there with his wife and children. The husband of the complainant redeemed that property after paying debt of the Punjabi and exercised possession over the house and agricultural land of that accused. Three months before the occurrence accused Abdul Karim approached her husband and requested him to return his hou
































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