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

1999 Supreme(Raj) 1530

MOHD.YAMIN
Jagdish – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. - Heard.

2. In this revision the complainant has challenged the acquittal of the accused-respondent for offence under section 354, Cr.P.C.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. The settled position of law is that the same principles apply to revisions against acquittals as they apply to the appeals.

4. I have seen the entire evidence recorded by the trial Court as well as the judgment of the trial Court. The statement of even prosecutrix does not make out a case of out raging her modesty. The learned trial Court has not committed any error of law in acquitting the accused-respondent for offence under section 354, Cr.P.C.Therefore, there is no reason to interfere in the order of acquittal. The revision is hereby dismissed.Revision dismissed.

*******

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