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

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P.SANDESH
A R SURESHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


This criminal revision petition is filed under Section 397

read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the order

dated 15.12.2021 passed in S.C.No.2/2012 on the file of the II

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitionerd and the

learned High Court Government Pleader for the State.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would

submit that in the case on hand, charges are framed for the

offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B, 404 and 201

read with Section 34 of IPC. The matter pertains to the year

2012 and the incident has taken place in 2011. The prosecution

has examined some of the witnesses and P.W.34 was not cross-

examined. Hence, an application was filed for cross-examination

of P.W.34 and also for recalling the witnesses P.Ws.10, 15, 16,

27, 28, 32, 35, 37 and 40. The Trial Court, while rejecting the

application in respect of P.Ws.10, 15, 16, 27, 28, 32, 35, 37 and

3

40 has given the reason that these witnesses have been

extensively cross-examined by the defence side and there is no

need for recalling the said witnesses. However, allowed the

application in respect of P.W.34. Hence, the p

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