K.J.THAKER
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
MAHENDRASINH HAKUMATSINH VAGHELA – Respondent
1. The State has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) against the judgment and order dated 07.04.2003 rendered by the learned 2nd Fast Track Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No.116 of 2002. The said case was registered against the present respondents-original accused for the offence under Sections 498-A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).
2. The original complainant filed Criminal Revision Application No.283/2003, wherein on 19.01.2015, this Court passed the following order:
“Learned Advocate Mr. R.C. Kakkad states that he may be permitted to appear with the prosecution. He seeks permission to withdraw the Criminal Revision Application No.283/2003. However, the papers should not be de-linked. The papers should be kept with Criminal Appeal No.812/2003 and the grounds urged in the Criminal Revision Application also are to be treated as part of the memo of the Appeal. All the matters be listed for final hearing on 9th FEBRUARY, 2015.”
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that
Girija Nandini Devi V. Bigendra Nandini Choudhary (1967) 1 SCR 93: (AIR 1967 SC 1124)
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. HEMAREDDY (AIR 1981 SC 1417)
State of Rajasthan vs. Sohan Lal and Others
MOOKKIAH AND ANR. VS. STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
LUNA RAM VS. BHUPAT SINGH AND ORS. ((2009) SCC 749)
CHANDRAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in (2007) 4 S.C.C. 415
M.S. NARAYANA MENON @ MANI VS. STATE OF KERALA & ANR (2006) 6 S.C.C. 39
Nika Ram v. State of H.P. : (AIR 1972 SC 2077)
Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra ((2006) 10 SCC 681)
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.