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

2003 Supreme(AP) 939

BILAL NAZKI, K.C.BHANU
Kamala Muniratnam – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


K. C. BHANU, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 16-7-2001, in Sessions Case No. 98/2000 on the file of the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Tirupati, whereby the accused therein were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302, rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 120-B and rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, with a direction to run the sentences concurrently.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case in brief are as follows. The deceased Mangamma is the wife of A1. Two or three days prior to 12-6-1999 the deceased informed P. Ws. 1 and 2 that A1 threated to kill her. They promised the deceased that they would enquire with A1. Thereafter, for three days the deceased was not seen. Then P. W. 1 sent P. W. 2 to enquire with the parents of A1. The parents of A1 informed P. W. 2 that the deceased went to her parents house. P. Ws. 1 and 2 caused enquiry with the parents of the deceased, but it was informed to them that the deceased had not come there. P. W. 1 then lodged a report with Alipiri Police Station on 14-6-1999 at 6 p. m. on the basis of whi
























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