SHRIKRISHNA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) PERUSED the case-diary.

(3.) IT is stated that the applicant alongwith co-accused had looted a golden chain, a watch, and cash of Rs. 600/- of the complainant on the point of gun and also caused injuries to him while committing robbery. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the complainant was not knowing the present applicant from before and that his name is said to have been mentioned because another co-accused Bharat was addressing the other person as Shrikrishna. It is further submitted that no identification parade has been conducted by the prosecution after the arrest of the present applicant. It is also argued that the black spect (chashma) is said to have been seized from the possession of the present applicant. But the complainant in his first information report, has not disclosed about the loot of his spect. It is further submitted that this is the only case registered against the present applicant, who has been in custody since 12.9.2005. After investigation, challan has been filed. The trial and disposal of the case is likely to take time.