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

1955 Supreme(All) 145

ASTHANA
NARENDRA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.N. Shukla, L. Chandra

JUDGMENT

[1] It appeared that the appellants along with four other persons, namely, Mathura Singh, Rup Narain Ram Pal alias Kallu and Ram Dularey, were charged under Section 395, I.P.C. for committing a dacoity at the house of one Ram Prasad on the night between the 15th and the 16th April, 1951 in Village Maryani, P.S. Bithore, district Kanpur. Two of them, namely Ram Autar and Ram Prasad, were also charged under Section 412, I.P.C. because some of the looted property was alleged to have been recovered from their possession.

The charge under Section 395, I.P.C. was tried with the aid of assessors the charge under Section 412, I.P.C. was tried with the aid of a jury, but the same persons who acted as assessors worked as jurors. The jury found Ram Autar & Ram Prasad guilty under Section 412, I.P.C. and the Sessions Judge accepted the verdict and convicted both of them under Section 412, I.P.C.

As regards the charge under Section 395, I.P.C. he was of the opinion that the offence of dacoity under Section 395, I.P.C. had not been proved against four of the accused persons, namely. Mathura Singh, Ram Pal alias Kallu, Ram Dularey and Rup Narain. He, therefore, acquitted them. He however,







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