RAZAK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case are:

(2.) The learned counsel for the appellant would contend that having regard to the stringent and inflexible punishment attracted for the offences alleged, the degree of proof required to bring home the charges is equally high and in that view of the matter, he would draw attention to the serious lacunae in the proceedings, which are even taken note of by the Trial Court. However, to the serious prejudice and detriment of the appellant, the Trial Court has held that the same would not vitiate the proceedings, while seeking to justify the lapses, which is impermissible in law. The benefit of doubt would have to be given to the accused.

(3.) The learned State Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, seeks to justify the findings of the trial court.