VENCIL PUSHPRAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(SC)-1990-11-64
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: RAJASTHAN)
Decided on November 01,1990

VENCIL PUSHPRAJ Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

PARAMJIT SINGH ALIAS BITTOO VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2010-8-85] [REFERRED TO]
RAJPUT ANIL RAMSINH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1991-4-3] [REFERRED TO]
ROSHAN PACKED MOVERS VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD [LAWS(ALL)-2003-4-211] [REFERRED TO]
SHAILENDRA KUMAR OJHA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2003-11-2] [REFERRED TO]
N V INTERNATIONAL NEW DELHI VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-1996-10-8] [REFERRED TO]
EESARAPU PYDIRAJU VS. STATE OF A P [LAWS(APH)-1998-4-101] [REFERRED TO]
GANNE VENKATA NARAYANA PRASAD VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-1998-9-17] [REFERRED TO]
B ARCHANA REDDY VS. STATE OF A P [LAWS(APH)-2005-11-64] [REFERRED TO]
MONGA VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-1992-9-19] [REFERRED TO]
TAMIL NADU TAMIL AND ENGLISH SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION REGD NO 17/94 NO 5 M P AVENUE MAJESTIC COLONY SALIGRAMAM MADRAS 93 VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2000-4-73] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK MANIKRAO ANDHARE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2002-6-80] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK BUILDERS VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1995-11-11] [REFERRED TO]
YUSUF BAIG VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2009-2-50] [REFERRED TO]
AJITHKUMAR VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2014-3-40] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH SINGH VS. STATE OF A P [LAWS(SC)-2004-3-33] [REFERRED TO]
PAWAN TRADING COMPANY VS. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR [LAWS(CAL)-2011-4-60] [REFERRED TO]
JITENDER @ KUKKI AND ORS. VS. STATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2011-3-526] [REFERRED TO]
PUTUL KUMAR VS. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2016-7-166] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH SINGH VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2003-12-138] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)- This appeal is preferred by the appellant who was arrayed as accused No. 2 before the Trial Court. This appellant along with one Kannu was tried for an offence u/ S. 302 read with S. 34 IPC on the allegation that on 17-8- 72 at about 9-00 or 9-30 p.m. he plucked the deceased and pinned him down by catching hold of his hands from behind and thereby facilitated the first accused (Kannu) to stab the deceased.
(2.)The Trial Court not accepting the evidence adduced as against this appellant acquitted him holding:
"It is, therefore, held that the prosecution could not bring home the guilt against the accused Pappu alias Rajesh beyond reasonable doubt and he deserves to be given benefit of doubt."

(3.)However, the Trial Court convicted Kannu u/ S. 302 simpliciter. The convicted accused Kannu preferred an appeal in C.A. No. 472 / 74. The State on being aggrieved by the acquittal of this appellant, filed an appeal challenging the order of his acquittal in C.A. No. 446 of 1975. The High Court dismissed the appeal of Kannu and allowed the State appeal and convicted the appellant u/ S. 302 read with S. 34 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Hence this present appeal by the appellant. It seems that Kannu has not preferred any appeal before this Court.
;


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