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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3095

PATNA HIGH COURT
Jitendra Kumar, J
Dharmendra Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant/s: Mr. Aryan Singh
For the Respondents: Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

8 31-01-2026 Ld. counsel for the appellant is pressing the prayer for suspending the execution of sentence and release of the appellant on bail during pendency of the appeal. The said prayer has been made as a part of memo of appeal.

2. I heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned APP for the State.

3. The appellant has been convicted under Sections and Sentenced to R.I. for ten years for offence punishable under Section 304B and R.I. for two years under Section 201 read accused have also been acquitted of all the charges.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is not sustainable in the eye of law, in view of the fact that the mother of the alleged victim who was informant and examined as P.W.- 5 has not supported the prosecution case at all. She has been declared hostile. Even, after cross-examination by the prosecution, nothing incriminating has been procured by it in support of its case against the appellant. Even sister/P.W.-3 and brother-in-law/P.W.4 have not supported the prosecution case against the appellant. P.W.-4/brother-in-law has been also

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