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

1989 Supreme(Ker) 330

K.SREEDHARAN
N. K. Narayanan – Appellant
Versus
V. Vidyadharan – Respondent


Judgment :-

Petitioners were office bearers of the Ambalapuzha Taluk S.N.D.P. Union. They published a notice exhorting the members of the union to contribute liberally towards a ten lakh fund for the purchase of 3.04 acres of property and buildings belonging to the Luther Mission, for the union. On the allegation that the amount so collected was misappropriated and thereby committed breach of trust, a private complaint was filed against the petitioners. Complainant, respondent in this petition, gave evidence as P.W. 1. Other ten persons were also examined in court. Thereupon learned Magistrate framed charges against the petitioners for offence u/Ss. 408 and 409 read with S. 34 of the Penal Code. Petitioners challenge the order framing charge by preferring this revision petition.

2. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that the evidence adduced by the complainant does not even prima facie bring out any offence against the petitioners. For the purpose of framing charge evidence let in by the complainant must be of such a nature that if it remains unrebutted it must warrant conviction of the accused. Such evidence, it is argued, has not been let in by the complainant.



















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