REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

KUSHAL PAL SINGH Appellant

V/S

STATE OF U.P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

D STEPHENS VS. NOSIBOLLA [REFERRED TO]
K CHINNASWAMY REDDY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH VS. SARJU SINGH [REFERRED TO]
KHETRABASI SAMUAL F VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
SHIVAJI SAHABRAO BOBADE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
SATYENDRA NATH DUTTA VS. RAM NARAIN [REFERRED TO]
DULI CHAND VS. DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
PATHUMMA VS. MUHAMMAD [REFERRED TO]
MUNNA DEVI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
JAGANNATH CHAUDHARY VS. RAMAYAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAM BRIKSH SINGH VS. AMBIKA YADAV [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GOA VS. SANJAY THAKRAN [REFERRED TO]
GIRJA PRASAD VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
JOHAR VS. MANGAL PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. SHERA RAM ALIAS VISHNU DUTTA [REFERRED TO]
SHIVASHARANAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri V.K. Agnihotri, learned counsel of revisionist and learned AGA for State of U.P.

(2.) This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., has been filed assailing judgment and order dated 17.01.2000 passed by learned VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Etawah, in Sessions Trial No. 266 of 1991, in Case Crime No. 76-A of 1989, under Sections 452 and 307 IPC, acquitting opposite parties- 2 to 4 from said offence. Being aggrieved, Informant preferred present revision.

(3.) Learned counsel for revisionist contended that Court below has not properly appreciated evidence in acquitting opposite party. He tried to take this Court to the judgment of Court below and made his endeavor to show that view taken by Court below in appreciating the evidence is not correct.

Click here to view full judgment.

KUSHAL PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address