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

2023 Supreme(Online)(MP) 24988

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Gyaneshwar – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Shyam Singh Tanwar,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1326 of 2019 BETWEEN:-

GYANESHWAR S/O SANTOSH PATIL, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR

1.

GRAM BEHADIYA THANA KHETIYA DISTT BARWANI (MADHYA PRADESH)

CHOTUMAL S/O SANTOSH PATIL, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MAJDURI VILLAGE

2.

BEHDIYA, THANA KHETIYA, (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT ( BY SHRI NAVIN KUMAR SINGH- ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH P.S. KHETIYA, (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS ( BY SHRI AMIT RAWAL- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This appeal coming on for judgment this day, Justice Vivek Rusia passed the following:

Heard and reserved on : 25.08.2023 Judgment pronounced on :01.09.2023 JUDGMENT With the consent of the parties, heard finally.

This criminal appeal is preferred under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.01.2019 passed in Sessions Trial No.95/2016 by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sendhwa Badwani by which the appellants herein have been convicted for an offence under Section 302 and 302/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo impris

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