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

1956 Supreme(All) 122

V.BHARGAVA, SAHAI
RUDDER – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.C.SAXENA, P.C.Chaturvedi, S.N.MISRA, SHRI RAMA

V. BHARGAVA, J.

( 1 ) DURING the hearing of this appeal it was pointed out by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants had been seriously prejudiced as the learned Sessions Judge during the trial had disallowed a certain question being put to one of the Important witnesses named Satya Narain.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution, the murder of Pahlad took place in a ghar while he was sleeping on a cot, and only other two persons who were in the ghar at the time of the murder were Sardar lal and Satya Narain who were also sleeping on two different cots a few paces away from the cot of Pahlad. Sardar Lal and Satya Narain are two of the witnesses on whose statements the prosecution relies to prove the case against the appellants. The murder is said to have been committed by Rudder appellant by firing two shots at Pahlad. Sardar Lal in his evidence stated that he woke up on hearing the sound of a shot being fired and thereafter saw the appellants running away which implies that he did not actually see any of the two shots being fired by Rudder appellant. The other witness, Satya Narain, who is a young boy aged 13 years also stated that he woke up on the sound of firing of a













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