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

2004 Supreme(MP) 776

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


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

A. K. GOHIL, J.

( 1 ) BOTH the aforesaid appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 20-8- 1994 passed in Sessions Trial No. 259/92. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 188/94 and Criminal Appeal No. 58/95. In Sessions Trial No. 259/92, eight accused persons were tried. Vide judgment dated 20-8-1994, III Additional Sessions Judge, Morena convicted Govind Sb Soneram under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life against which Govind has filed Criminal Appeal No. 188/94 challenging his conviction and sentence and acquitted the rest of the accused persons namely Brij Sf0. Soneram, Soneram Sf0 Gangaram, Ramnivas S/c Lajjaram, Durga Sb Soneram, Kalicharan Sb Lajjaram, Kaladhar Sb Lajjaram and Maniram Sf0 Lajjaram and against the acquittal of the aforesaid accused persons, State has filed Criminal Appeal No. 58/95 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 Sf0 Vrindavan, his brother Girraj, Bablu, Satish, Ashok and cousin Ramnivas we






























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