TULSIRAM Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner has called in question the order passed by the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Bidar in Spl. C.C. No. 50/2011 in rejecting his application filed u/S 239 of the Cr.P.C. and refused to discharge the accused in the said case vide order dated 21.08.2014. The petitioner has sought before this Court to set aside the said order passed by the learned Sessions Judge.

(2.) BEFORE adverting to the legal and factual aspects involve in this particular case it is just and necessary to bare in mind the brief factual matrix of the case.

(3.) THE learned counsel further argued that the petitioner has categorically stated about his agricultural properties and how he has acquired those properties and also the agreements of sale in respect of the properties held by him and acquired the amount out of the lease agreement dated 16.06.1998, etc. but these materials have not been properly considered and appreciated by the trial Court and brushed aside the said documents only on the ground that source of those properties have not been explained by the accused.