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

A.M.KHANWILKAR, DINESH MAHESHWARI
MANJIT SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Kamini Jaiswal, Vijay Panjwani, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Jaspreet Gogia, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Maheshwari, J.

1. These two appeals by special leave are directed against the common judgment and order dated 11.03.2008, as passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal Nos. 373 DB of 2005 and 350 DB of 2005 with other connected matters whereby, the High Court has upheld the judgment and order dated 28/30.03.2005 by the Sessions Judge, Barnala in Sessions Case No. 21 of 2001, convicting and sentencing the accused-appellants for multiple offences, including those punishable under Sections 148, 302/149, 323, 324 and 326/149 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’).

2. Put in brief, the relevant background aspects of the matter are as follows:

2.1. The prosecution case has been that on 03.03.2001, the deceased Dalip Singh, Rajinder Pal Singh (PW-5), Gurnam Singh (PW-6) and the complainant Beant Singh [The complainant Beant Singh was examined as the first witness in the trial but he expired before completion of his statement.], all residents of Village Mehal Kalan had gone to Barnala Court Complex in connection with the hearing in a crimi

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