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

1963 Supreme(MP) 103

T.P.NAIK, SHIV DAYAL, K.L.PANDEY
GANGARAM RAGHUNATH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.D.Dube

SHIV DAYAL, J.

( 1 ) GANGARAM, who appears to be a lad of 13 or 14 years, has been convicted of the offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code, by the Additional Sessions, judge, Jagdalpur.

( 2 ) GANGARAM appellant and Ghanshyam, the deceased, were nearly of the same age, both residents of village Bhanbeda. On November 1, 1961, they both went out from Bhanbeda village together. At that time the accused had a Pharsi, while the deceased had a Tangia. They did not return to their village that night, but stayed at the house of Cherku (P. W. 7) in village Dabkatta. Next day, Cherku asked Itwari (P. W. 5) to reach the boys to their village. On their way, the two boys slipped away. On the evening of Thursday, Gangaram accused alone returned to the village. When he was asked about Ghanshyam, he stated that he and ghanshyam had been lifted in a truck by some Dandukaranyawalas, but he (Gangaram) could manage to jump out of the truck. This answer was not satisfactory. Raghunath (P. W. 3), father of the accused asked him how it was that he did not receive any injury when he jumped out of the truck. Eventually, Gangaram confessed his guilt to his father the next morning. Raghunath took the acc








































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