Back
SUPREME COURT
Unknown, J
Badrilal and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the trial court's initial decision was based on the prosecution's failure to prove the case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the credibility of eyewitness testimony is central to this case. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. discrepancies in evidence led to doubt in the identification of the accused. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. the high court is entitled to appraise evidence but must respect trial findings. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
1. Altogether seven persons were put on trial for offences under S.148, S.323 and S.302/149 of the Penal Code, 1860. The trial court by its judgment and order dated 20-1-1997 acquitted all the accused persons. Aggrieved by their acquittal, the State preferred an appeal and the High Court by the impugned judgment maintained the acquittal of the three accused persons but convicted the appellants under S.302/34 and
323/34 of the Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for one year respectively.
3. According to the prosecution, on 29-1-1994, the informant Madan Lai (PW 6) and his father Dhulji, the deceased, were sleeping in a room adjoining their field and his nephew PW 1, Rameshwar was sleeping outside. According to th
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
