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

2016 Supreme(P&H) 2703

M.JEYAPAUL, G.S.SANDHAWALIA
State of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Mukesh – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Applicant: Mr. Ashok Muthreja, DAG, Haryana.

JUDGMENT

Mr. M. Jeyapaul, J.:- CRM-31394-2016

1. The State of Haryana has filed the application praying for condonation of delay of 29 days in filing the appeal. We are convinced with the reasons assigned for the delay. Therefore, the delay is condoned and the application is allowed.

CRM-A-1807-MA of 2016

2. Aggrieved by the acquittal of accused Mukesh and Rakesh who were charged under Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 3 of SC/ST Act, the State of Haryana has filed the present application praying for grant of leave to prefer an appeal.

3. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that PW3 Naveen had seen accused Mukesh and Rakesh taking Pawan (since deceased) on a bike. Accused Mukesh and Rakesh were asking Pawan to swim in the canal. But Pawan was replying that he would prefer to swim at Kendriya Vidalaya swimming pool by making necessary payment. Accused Mukesh and Rakesh forced Pawan for swimming in the canal. The father of deceased Pawan lodged a complaint that his son Pawan who left his house

for Central School for learning swimming on 10.5.2015 did not return to house. He suspected that his neighbour Mukesh might have kidnapped his son.

4. PW11 Dr. Pankaj Chhikara, Assistant





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