Ashok vs State of Madhya Pradesh - 2024 Supreme(SC) 1026

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 1026

M. M. SUNDRESH, ARAVIND KUMAR
Ashok – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Shikhil Shiv Suri, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Madhu Suri, Adv. Ms. Jyoti Suri, Adv. Ms. Wamika Chadha, Adv. Ms. Ishita Ahuja, Adv. Mr. Vibhor Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Deva Vrat Anand, Adv. Mr. T. R. B. Sivakumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Bhupendra Pratap Singh, D.A.G. Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Adv. Mr. Susheel Tomar, Adv.

ORDER

1. The appellant along with the three other accused persons, who were none other than his own mother, father and one individual named, Shankar, were charged for the offences under Sections 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Trial Court rendered the conviction placing reliance on the evidence of PW 1 to PW-4, though PW-4 turned hostile insofar as the recovery is concerned. The different witnesses who adduced evidence on behalf of the appellant were not considered by the Trial Court.

2. On appeal, the High Court concurred with the view of the trial Court - which acquitted the other co-accused persons and the observation made while acquitting the other accused was based upon the very same testimony relied upon while convicting the appellant. While doing so, the High Court went into the evidence of the different witnesses and then held that they cannot be relied upon, as they were unnatural since after knowing about the alleged occurrence they did not take any further steps.

3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant contended that based on the same set of evidence put forth, the co-accused have been acquitted. Though the principle of “false in uno,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document