Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Farman – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
1. The present revision is directed against the order dated 30.04.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur (learned Trial Court) vide which the petitioner (accused before learned Trial Court) were charged with the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148, 341 and 427 read with Sections 149 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision are that the police filed a charge sheet against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 326, 325, 427 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was asserted that the police received an information on 24.10.2023 that one person was brought to the hospital after a quarrel. The police went to the hospital for verification of the information. Rakesh Kumar (injured) made a statement that he was going to his home on 24.10.2023 on his motorcycle bearing registration No. HP-17E-4072. He was carrying Rs.3,98,000/- with him. 2-3 vehicles stopped near the Nanj factory at 9.00 PM. The accused, Mahender Singh, and 15-20 persons came out of the vehicles and st
At charge framing stage, prima facie case or grave suspicion suffices; no threadbare evidence analysis. Postmortem linking leg injury to kidney degeneration via vascular failure establishes nexus for....
At the stage of framing of the charge, the accused has no right to produce any material, and the trial court has to apply its judicial mind to the facts of the case to determine whether a case has be....
The court established that a charge under Section 302 IPC can be framed based on grave suspicion, and the causation of death related to the injuries sustained must be determined through trial evidenc....
Discharge stage limits court to prima facie case assessment without evidence scrutiny; 'dangerous to life' injury equals grievous hurt, but single abdominal sharp blow amid road rage insufficient for....
Appellate courts interfere with acquittal only if perverse or no reasonable view possible; non-explanation of accused injuries, witness contradictions, inconsistent prosecution version justify uphold....
The conviction for attempt to murder was altered to causing hurt due to insufficient evidence proving grievous injuries or intent to kill.
Conviction modified to Section 304 A IPC as prosecution failed to prove that the accused acted with intent or knowledge to cause death; incident deemed accidental.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
