Home   |   About us   |   Contact us   |   Request Callback  


This Page To:

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH V/S PAPPU @ RAKESH & OTHERS, decided on Thursday, August 10, 2017.
[ In the Supreme Court of India, Criminal Appeal No. 1924 of 2010. ] 10/08/2017
Advocate(s) : C.D. Singh, Prateek Rusia, Avi Pandey.
Judgment Full Text : Existing LawyerServices Members, kindly login above.

Non Members, Enter your email address:- and , to request this judgment.

Alternatively, you may send a request by email to info@lawyerservices.in for the Full Text of this Judgment (chargeable).

LawyerServices Facebook Page

Judgments that may be related:-

  Santhini Versus Vijaya Venketesh,   09/10/2017.  

  Prafulla Vinayak Nage Versus The State of Maharashtra,   26/09/2017.  

  Krishna Veni Nagam Versus Harish Nagam,   09/03/2017.  

  The State of Madhya Pradesh & Another Versus Veerendra & Another,   14/07/2016.  

  Vinod Versus State,   08/02/2016.  

  Ram Swaroop Pathak Versus State of M.P.,   05/03/2015.  

  Abdul Rahaman Kunji & Others Versus The State of West Bengal,   14/11/2014.  

  State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Deepak & Others,   10/09/2014.  

  Allauddin Versus State (NCT of Delhi),   04/04/2014.  

  Sher Singh @ Sheru Versus State,   09/01/2014.  

  Papu Singh @ Pappi Versus State of Rajasthan,   04/10/2013.  

  Laxmi Narayan & Others Versus State of Rajasthan,   26/08/2013.  

  Nand Kishore Gurjar @ Tammi & Another Versus State of Rajasthan,   14/06/2013.  

  Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav & Others Versus The State of Bihar through the C.B.I.,   17/05/2013.  

  Bhagwandas Versus State of Madhya Pradesh,   10/05/2013.  

  Sangeet Singh @ Pappu Singh Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh,   07/05/2013.  

  Sanjay Jaywant Gaikwad & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others,   04/01/2013.  

  Ashok Kumar Versus State of UP,   09/05/2012.  

  State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Ps- Gotegaon Versus Chikki @ Chandramohan S/O Sriram Varma & Others,   16/02/2012.  

  Pawan Shukla Versus State of M.P.,   14/02/2012.  

  Rashid Alam @ Gabbar & Another Versus The State of West Bengal & Another,   29/08/2011.  

  Devender Kumar & Others Versus State,   29/07/2011.  

  The State of Maharashtra & Another Versus Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab @ Abu Mujahid & Another,   21/02/2011.  

  Vishal Singh Versus State of M.P.,   03/02/2011.  

  Murarilal Sharma Versus State Of Madhya Pradesh,   31/08/2010.  

  Vinay Kumar Kedia Versus State Of M. P.,   07/05/2010.  

  Parwat Singh Versus State of Madhya Pradesh,   11/02/2010.  

  Mahesh Prasad Mishra Versus Pappu Babu Saxena,   29/01/2010.  

  Pappu Alias Kamod Versus State Of Madhya Pradesh,   22/01/2010.  

  Kailash Agarawal Versus State Of M.P.,   05/01/2010.  

  Jagdish Versus State of M.P.,   28/08/2009.  

  Khemlal Versus State Of Madhya Pradesh,   27/07/2009.  

  Jitu @ Jitender Versus State of M.P. ,   05/03/2009.  

  Sunil Tiwari Versus State Of Madhya Pradesh,   13/02/2009.  

  Dhananjay s/o Gopi @ Gopal Pachauri Versus State of M.P., P.S. Saikheda,   15/07/2008.  

  Ram Khiladi Gurjar Versus State Of M P,   16/04/2008.  

  Ashok Kumar Jain Versus State Of Madhya Pradesh,   07/03/2008.  

  Gopal Versus State of M.P.,   05/02/2008.  

  State of M.P. Versus Raghuveer Singh,   09/01/2008.  

  Lilli Alias Surendra Pandey Versus State,   25/09/2007.  

  Radhelal Versus State Of Madhya Pradesh,   19/03/2007.  

  Sanjay Versus State ,   11/10/2006.  

  Surendra Singh @ Pappu Singh Versus State of Madhya Pradesh,   17/05/2006.  

  Murari Versus State of M.P.,   23/02/2001.  

  State of Maharashtra Versus Prakash Dhawal Khairnar (Patil) & Others,   07/12/2000.  

  State of M.P. Versus Khizar Mohammad,   24/02/1996.  

  Rajendra Raju Matki Versus State Of M.P.,   28/03/1994.  

  Prakash Chander Versus State of Delhi,   16/12/1993.  

  Prakash Chander Versus The State ,   14/12/1993.  

  Avadhesh Mani Mema Versus Saroj Amita Mema,   26/09/1988.  

#LawyerServices #bestlegalsoftware #legalsoftware #judgment #caselaw

    This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment dated 28.3.2008 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 1999 wherein the High Court has allowed the appeal filed by the respondents herein against the judgment dated 23.12.1998 of the Additional Sessions Judge District Sheopur Kalan Madhya Pradesh in Session Trial No. 268 of 1994 and thereby acquitted the accused/Respondent No.1 herein from the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and accused/Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 from the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant-State of Madhya Pradesh.3. Even though service of notice is complete on all the respondents but no one has entered appearance on their behalf.4. So far as respondent No. 1 (Accused No. 5) Man Singh who was the main accused is concerned appeal against him has already been dismissed as abated vide this Court's order dated 3rd February 2015.5. It is to be noted that P.W.-1 Gangadhar is the person who has lodged the F. I. R. He is the son of deceased (Mathuralal). He alleged that his father died because of the injuries caused by Man Singh who has given a blow on the head of the deceased. He specifically alleged that Man Singh has caused injury with Gandasa on the head of the deceased from the sharp side.6. Further P.W.-4 Devlal is another eye witness who has not specifically assigned any injury to any of the accused and has merely given an omnibus statement that all the accused have caused injury to the deceased by sickle (Gandasa) lathis and spear. According to him accused Mansingh had a Gandasa accused Brahma Pappu and Banshi had lathis and accused Mansharam was empty handed. Injuries by sickle (Gandasa) and spear (Barchi) are not found on the body of the deceased. In such circumstances the statement of Devlal (PW-4) is also doubtful.7. In our opinion the High Court is justified in recording that as per the statement of the doctor who performed the autopsy there is no injury to the deceased by sharp and edged weapon on the head or any part of the body of the deceased. Thus the injury on the head of the deceased attributed to respondents becomes doubtful.8. Moreover there is no evidence on record to show who caused the injury on the head of the deceased. Gangadhar (P.W-1) in his statement has stated that accused Pappu caused injury on the hand of the deceased while accused Bramha and Banshi had caused injury by lathi on the stomach and chest of the deceased. These injuries are not attributed to be the cause of the death of the deceased. Additionally the deceased had died due to the head injury which is not attributable to any of the accused.9. Taking into consideration the overall evidence the High Court has rightly come to a conclusion that there is no specific allegation against the main accused. Nevertheless it should be noted that he has subsequently died after his acquittal by the High Court. Additionally there is no dispute as to fact that the rest of the accused were not carrying deadly weapons which could cause death of the deceased.10. In the facts and circumstances of the case we see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.