KEDAR NATH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
LAWS(SC)-1990-11-90
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADHYA PRADESH)
Decided on November 08,1990

KEDAR NATH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

PARVEZ @ TANTRIK VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2022-9-28] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-1998-9-186] [REFERRED TO]
RANA PRASAD DAS VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(GAU)-2011-5-23] [REFERRED TO]
BABURAO RAJARAM BHAIRAT VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-10-105] [REFERRED TO]
KEWAL KRISHAN GUPTA VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [LAWS(J&K)-1998-11-42] [REFERRED]
RAMCHARAN PATEL VS. STATE OF M. P. [LAWS(MPH)-2021-1-5] [REFERRED TO]
KHALAKSING VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-1991-11-4] [RELIED ON]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Appeal No. 99/79 is preferred by one Kedar Nath who stands convicted under Section 201, IPC and sentenced to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment whereas Criminal Appeal No. 100/ 79 is preferred by one Baijnath who stands convicted under Section 302, IPC and also u/S.201, IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and three years'respectively. These two appeals arise out of a common judgment. According to the prosecution, the deceased in this case used to sell out piece cloths by carrying them on his cycle. On the date of the occurrence, he went to the market for selling the cut-pieces of cloth but he did not return. A search was also not fruitful. Therefore, on 13-5-73 his brother made a complaint before the police. Thereafter on a tip off, a constable (PW 1) attached to the concerned Police Station made an entry in the first information report. The investigation proceeded on the strength of the report given by PW 24 and on the basis of information of PW 1 who is said to have obtained that information from an undisclosed informant. During the course of the investigation Baijnath was arrested on 29-5-73. The case of the prosecution is that on the information given by this Baijnath the dead body was recovered which was in a highly decomposed and beyond identification. Some cloth pieces were also seized pursuant to the statement given by this Baijnath along with some parts of the cycle. The appellant Baijnath was a licensee, owning a gun. His gun was seized and sent for examination to the ballistic expert (PW 23) to examine whe'ther the flattened lead pellets recovered from near the dead body could have been fired by the gun of Baijnath. PW 23 opined that the said pellets could have been fired from the gun of Baijnath.
(2.)Appellant, Kedar Nath was arrested on 31-5-73 and in pursuance of his statement, certain cloths, said to have been carried by the deceased were recovered.
(3.)The trial Court found the appellant Baijnath guilty of the offences u/Ss., 302 and 201, IPC and convicted him as aforementioned which conviction and sentence were confirmed by the High Court. The trial Court further convicted Kedar Nath u/ S. 201, IPC and sentenced him. The High Court upheld the conviction of Kedar Nath also.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.