K.LAKSHMAN
Manasa alias Jwala – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana, rep. by Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
The present Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.231 of 2019 of Bhongir Town Police Station, Rachkonda Commissionerate. The petitioner herein is sole accused in the said Crime. The offence alleged against her is under Section 302 of IPC.
2. Heard Mr. Brahmadandi Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 -State. Despite service of notice, none appears on behalf of respondent No.2 -de facto complainant.
3. On the complaint lodged by respondent No.2, the police of Bhongir Town, have registered a case in Crime No.231 of 2019, initially under Section - 174 of Cr.P.C. A perusal of the record would reveal that deceased - Bandaru Shiva Kumar got married to Mrs. Uma Maheshwari on 16.03.2015, and out of their wedlock, they have blessed with a male child, named Bandaru Koushik. Thereafter, matrimonial disputes arose between them and the first wife of the deceased left his company stating in written that she is not interested to lead matrimonial life with the deceased. Then, the deceased had decided to marry the petitioner, for which, the parents of petitioner asked him to give an undertaking
Bhagwan Tukaram Dange v. State of Maharashtra
Bhajju alias Karan Singh v. State of M.P.
Chirra Shivraj v. State of A.P.
Govindaraju @ Govinda v. State of Sriramapuram P.S.
Harbans Singh v. State of Punjab
K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor
Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar v. The State of Maharashtra
Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay
Lallu Manjhi and Anr. vs. State of Jharkhand (2003) 2 SCC 401
M. Sarvana alias K.D. Saravana v. State of Karnataka, 2012 CrLJ 3877 (SC)
M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra
Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre
P. Mani v. State of Tamil Nadu
Paparambaka Rosamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh
Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Limited v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
State of Andhra Pradesh v. P.V. Pavithran
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
State of M.P. v. Vishweshwar Kol
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Suresh alias Chhavan
Umakant v. State of Chhattisgarh
Point of Law : Offence of Murder - Inherit Powers of High Court - power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, in ‘rarest of rare cases’. (The rarest of rare cases standard in....
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations, the burden of proving the dying declaration lies on the prosecution, and the power of the trial court to judge its reliability and admissibili....
A dying declaration must be trustworthy and corroborated; significant discrepancies in the statement led to acquittal due to reasonable doubt not established by prosecution.
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if deemed credible and made in a fit state of mind, as established in this case.
The court affirmed that a dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if it is credible, voluntary, and made in a fit state of mind.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.