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

1990 Supreme(Raj) 396

S.N.BHARGAVA
Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:M.L. Garg, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Vimal Mathur, P.P.

JUDGMENT

1. - This appeal has been directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar, convicting the accused appellant Under Section 307, Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to three years's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/-.

2. FIR in this case has been lodged by PW 1 Heeranand who has been declared hostile. Similarly all other alleged eye witnesses, namely, PW 2 Ram Chander, PW 4 Subhash Chandra, PW 6 Hansraj, PW 7 Norangrai and PW 8 Bodaldas have been declared hostile None of them has supported the prosecution story as given in the FIR. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has based his conviction solely on the evidence of PW 10 Radhey Shyam and the recovery of the pistol at the instance of the accused. It may be mentioned at the outset that the pistol was a licensed one and the licence was also in the name of the accused appellant and he had handed over the pistol along with the licence.

3. I have carefully gone through the First Information Report as also the statement of all the witnesses, including PW 10 Radhey Shyam. Radhey Shyam also has not fully and entirely supported the prosecution story as given in the FIR and a bare p






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