MADHAVA REDDY
Sanapala Krishna Morthy – Appellant
Versus
State represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, Srikakulam – Respondent
( 2 ) P. WS. 1 and 2 who are said to be direct witnesses to the occurrence were examined and the accused wanted that the other so-called eye-witnesses also should be examined. That petition having been dismissed, they moved the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Additional district Magistrate, Srikakulam, to refer the matter to the High Court. That petition having been dismissed, they have filed this criminal revision case.
( 3 ) THE case against the six accused is for offences under sections 147, 323, Indian penal Code. It was originally taken up as calender case but was later converted into a P. R. C. proceeding. Among several eyewitnesses, two witnesses were examined. The learned Magistrate having found that the evidence of these two witnesses, who according to their statements, were present at the time of occunence, is supported by the wound certificate regarding injuries to P. W. 1 did not think it necessary in the interest of justice to exami
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.