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

2019 Supreme(SC) 1195

MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR, AJAY RASTOGI
Rajender @ Rajesh @ Raju – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the appellant :Sushil Balwad, Advocate
For the Respondent:B.V. Balaram Das, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, J.

1. The judgment dated 27.08.2009 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Criminal Appeal Nos. 144 of 2007 and 51 of 2007 has been called in question in the instant appeals. By the impugned judgment, the High Court affirmed the order of conviction passed by the Trial Court against Sharda Jain (A-1), Raj Kumar (A-2), Pushpender (A-3), Nirvikar (A-4), Rajender (A5) and Roshan Singh (A-6) for offences under Section 302 r/w 120-B and Section 364 r/w 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter ‘IPC’). Sharda Jain, Raj Kumar, and Roshan Singh were also convicted under Section 201 r/w 120-B of the IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that Atma Ram Gupta (hereinafter ‘deceased’) who was a Councillor of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter “MCD’) went missing on 24.08.2002. On that day, he left his residence around 10.30 a.m. informing his wife Sumitra Gupta (PW-18) that he would first be going to the house of another Councillor of the MCD, Sharda Jain (A-1) and then be proceeding to attend a Congress Party rally at the Ferozshah Kotla Grounds along with her. His driver, Prabhu Yadav (PW-17) drove him to the residence of Sharda Jain and

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