STATE Vs. MEENA KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted Meena Kumari because of the discrepancies which he found in the prosecution evidence. In consequence of the discrepancies, he held that the case had not been proved beyond all reasonable doubt.

(2.) Before I advert to the discrepancies in the evidence to which the judge refers, I think, it is necessary to recall two rules of practice, which, it seems to me, the judge probably forgot. As I said in Inder Singh and Surender Vs. State, I.L.R. (1978) 1 D. 633 : 78 RLR.493.

(3.) Thereafter, I quoted passages from Brown Vs. Dunn (1893) 6 R. 67 '(22), in support of what I had said. We were told that an appeal against that judgment was dismissed by the Supreme Court, and, therefore, what I said in that case should be taken to be good law.