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

2004 Supreme(MP) 774

S.S.JHA, A.K.GOHIL
GOVIND – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. , – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ami Prabal, Himanshu Kaushal, J.P.Gupta, Madhukar Kulshrestha

( 1 ) BOTH the aforesaid appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 20-8-1994 passed in Sessions Trial no. 259/1992. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 188/ 1994 and Criminal Appeal No. 58/1995. In sessions Trial No. 259/1992, eight accused persons were tried. Vide judgment dated 20-8-1994, III Additional Sessions Judge, morena convicted Govind S/o Soneram under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life against which Govind has filed Criminal Appeal No. 188/1994 challenging his conviction and sentence and acquitted the rest of the accused persons namely Brij S/o Soneram, Soneram S/o gangaram, Ramnivas S/o Lajjaram, Durga s/o Soneram, Kalicharan S/o Lajjaram, kaladhar S/o Lajjaram and Maniram S/o lajjaram and against the acquittal of the aforesaid accused persons, State has filed criminal Appeal No. 58/1995 after obtaining leave from this Court. Both these appeals have been heard together and they are being decided by this common judgment.

( 2 ) IN short, the prosecution story is that on 19-8-1992 at about 9 AM in the morning, when complainant Kamlesh S/o vrindavan, his brother Girraj, Bablu, Satish, ashok and cousin Ramnivas wer





























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