VINAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O. P. Jain, J. Sri Tarun Kumar Srivastava is present for the revisionist and A. G. A. for the State.

(2.) REVISIONIST has been convicted under Sections 323,324, and 294,1. P. C. on the allegation that he outraged the modes ty of Km. Anita and when she protested he resorted to violence.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel has cited State of Gujarat v. Mohan Lal Jitamalji Porwal & Anr. , in support of the contention that the additional evidence can be led before the appellate Court. A perusal of the case shows that the evidence which was ad mitted was of a formal character and to remove a technical defect.