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

2001 Supreme(MP) 339

FAIZAN UDDIN
TEHSILDAR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PADAM SINGH, PRAVIN MISHRA, Rakesh Saxena

FAIZAN UDDIN, J.

( 1 ) SHRI Rakesh Saxena, Counsel for the applicant. Shri Padam Singh, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the respondent No. 1/state. Shri Praveen Mishra, Counsel for the respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4. With the consent of the parties, the revision is finally heard.

( 2 ) THIS revision petition is against the order dated 27-11-2000, passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Morena in Sessions Trial No. 256/2000, whereby the applicant/accused has been charged for the offence under Section 302 of I. P. C. read with Sections 27 and 25 (i) (b) of the Arms Act.

( 3 ) THE facts leading to filing this case are as under : The incident had occurred on 18-4-2000 at 8/8. 30 a. m. in the morning while complainant Subedar Singh s/o Albelsingh accompanied by his brother Tehsildarsingh and sister Usha was going to the field on the tracter and when he was at some distance of his house, what he saw is that accused Tikamsingh, Prahladsingh and Ramraj came from the front side, accused Ramraj was armed with gun. It is stated that accused Tikamsingh and Prahlad Singh filthyly abused him and also threatened to kill him. Thereafter, it is alleged that accused Ramraj, with intention to kill, fired fr




















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