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

2024 Supreme(SC) 95

VIKRAM NATH, RAJESH BINDAL
Vithal – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Charudatta Vijayrao Mahindrakar, AOR

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal was heard for admission, as a fresh case on 13.12.2023. While reserving orders, we had required Mr. S. Nagamuthu, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant to submit written brief by 05.01.2024. The same has since been filed.

3. Prima-facie, we were inclined to dismiss the appeal, however, after considering the submissions, we feel that this appeal raises a substantial question which needs to be addressed and decided by this Court. Since we had heard the matter at length and, also considered the written brief, we are referring to the brief facts of the case and the substantial question which arises in this appeal so that it may be of assistance at the time of final hearing of the matter.

4. Four accused were charge sheeted for offences punishable under sections 341, 302 and 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601 [IPC]. The Trial Court after considering the evidence led during the trial, convicted all the four accused for the offences punishable under sections 302, 341 and 506 read with section 34 of the IPC vide judgment dated 22.11.2016 and further awarded sentence on 28.11.2016. In addition to the sentence to undergo

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