Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL, J
SALIM MALIK @ MUNNA – Appellant
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of case and charges (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments against charges (Para 2 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 26 , 27 , 30 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 36) |
| 3. court's observations on evidence (Para 11 , 18 , 24 , 25 , 29 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 44 , 46 , 48 , 52) |
| 4. legal principles and precedents cited (Para 20 , 28 , 35 , 45 , 47 , 49 , 51 , 53) |
| 5. final judgment and order (Para 55 , 56) |
JUDGMENT
1. This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”) assails the order on charge (“impugned order”) dated 24th July 2023, passed by Additional Sessions Judge-03 (“ASJ”) North East, Karkardooma Courts in SC No. 121/2021, titled ‘State v. Rafat and Ors’ arising out of FIR No.136/2020, registered at Police Station (‘P.S’ Dayalpur. By this order, charges were framed against petitioner under Section 147 , 148 , 427 , 435 , 436 , 450 read with Section 149 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“ IPC ”)
2. The gravamen of petitioner’s challenge is that the charges framed against petitioner are based on inadmissible disclosures, delayed and unreliable witness stat
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
