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

2001 Supreme(MP) 152

S.C.PANDEY
MOHAN SINGH PATEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN SHUKLA, WAKEEL KHAN

S. C. PANDEY, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order dated 27/6/2000, passed by the Special Judge (appointed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth Tthe Act) as well as Additional Sessions Judge. Narsinghpur, in Sessions Trial No. 122/99.

( 2 ) BY the impugned order dated 27-6-2000, the applicants were directed to be, made accused persons in exercise of powers under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for having committed murder of Jamna Bai wife of Rati Ram.

( 3 ) IT appears from the prosecution case that in the First Information Report lodged by Rati Ram in the Police Station. Narsinghpur he had alleged that the murder of Jamna Bai was committed by the applicants. However, the prosecution did not accept the version of Rati Ram and lodged the charge sheet against the accused Rati Ram, the husband of the deceased Jamna Bai.

( 4 ) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case including the impugned order.

( 5 ) DURING the course of the trial, it appears that there was some corroboration to the First Info




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