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

2011 Supreme(SC) 1044

H.L.DATTU, HANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD
GARLAPATI KRISHNA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF A. P REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Respondent


ORDER

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1113 of 2004 dated 11th August, 2006. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has affirmed the findings and the conclusions reached by the II Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.II) in S.C.No.159 of 2001 dated 21.04.2004. The Trial Court, after ignoring the minor contradictions, has come to the conclusion that the Prosecution has proved the case against the accused person. Accordingly, it has convicted and sentenced the accused person to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C.').

2. We have heard Mr.A.T.M.Ranga Ramanujam, learned senior counsel for the appellant. The learned senior counsel would contend that the finding and conclusion reached by the Trial Court is fully perverse and, therefore, requires interference of this Court. In support of this contention, the learned senior counsel would take us through the evidence of P.W.Nos.1,2,6, 16 and 17.

3. We have carefully perused the evidence that was read to us by Shri Ranga Ramanujam. After reading the evidence, we canno





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