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

2002 Supreme(MP) 636

DEEPAK VERMA
DEVISINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMIT AGRAWAL, CHANDER BHUSHAN

DEEPAK VERMA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal has been preferred by the convicted appellants, who have been found guilty for commission of offence under S. 3 (1) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Garoth in Special Cr. Case No. 73/91, decided on 6-8-1993 and have been awarded sentence of 2 year RI with fine of Rs. 2,000/- each.

( 2 ) IN all five accused persons were charged and prosecuted for commission of alleged offence under S. 3 (1) (v) or in the alternative under S. 3 (1) (x) of the Act. However, one of the accused Mana has been acquitted of the said charge but the remaining four have been found guilty only u/s. 3 (1) (v) of the Act and have been awarded punishment as mentioned above.

( 3 ) AS per the prosecution story on 12-9-1991 the appellant had gone to the field of complainant Bhoniram and started scolding him. It is said that he was also beaten with fists and legs. They had done so with an intention to grab the land of complainant Bhoniram illegally and unauthorisedly. Bhoniram had lodged a written complaint with the Superintendent of Police, Mandsaur, who










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