RAMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(SC)-2002-4-132
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: RAJASTHAN)
Decided on
April 05,2002
RAMA
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
SUBODH AWASTHY VS. STATE OF U.P [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-101] [REFERRED TO]DRIGPAL VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2016-9-426] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH & OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-7-321] [REFERRED TO]
PAPPU VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-170] [REFERRED TO]
BABU VANSHA GANGAD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-4-21] [REFERRED TO]
SATENDRA KUMAR VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-9-76] [REFERRED TO]
SUBRATA PRADHAN VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2022-3-153] [REFERRED TO]
AZAM VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-367] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH YADAV (JAIL APPEAL) VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-2-475] [REFERRED TO]
GIRWAR AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-3-143] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH KUMAR DIXIT VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-9-274] [REFERRED TO]
AMAR NATH BHATTACHARJEE VS. PRASENJIT KUMAR BOSE [LAWS(CAL)-2006-3-64] [REFERRED TO]
MOULASAB VS. THALAK POLICE STATION [LAWS(KAR)-2012-8-138] [REFERRED TO]
HIDAYAT ALI VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2022-5-1] [REFERRED TO]
DEVIDAS LOKA RATHOD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2018-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ KISHORE PANDEY & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-9-293] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PHAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-7-340] [REFERRED TO]
HIRA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-311] [REFERRED TO]
NAKUL SINGH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-610] [REFERRED TO]
KARAN SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-205] [REFERRED TO]
CHHOTEY LAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-8-90] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN DAS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-2-465] [REFERRED TO]
KHUSHI LAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-5-510] [REFERRED TO]
TANGA RUYI VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(GAU)-2022-9-103] [REFERRED TO]
C.BALU VS. N.SARAVANAN [LAWS(MAD)-2022-9-25] [REFERRED TO]
GEETA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-3-57] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-411] [REFERRED TO]
RAJA RAM AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-441] [REFERRED TO]
BHUWAL KAHAR VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-215] [REFERRED TO]
YASEEN VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-13] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN LAL VS. STATE [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-1-198] [REFERRED TO]
GANESH BHAGYA MANDAVKAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-1-147] [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI DUBEY VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2019-11-257] [REFERRED TO]
ROSHAN SINGH VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-36] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-254] [REFERRED TO]
RAM SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-9-311] [REFERRED TO]
SABIR BEG VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-8-89] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH SETHIA @ RAJENDRA SETHIA VS. CENTRAL BUREAU INVESTIGATION [LAWS(CAL)-2013-11-100] [REFERRED TO]
NARESH VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-464] [REFERRED TO]
PURNWASI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-544] [REFERRED TO]
DHARMENDRA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-1-459] [REFERRED TO]
ALLAUDDIN KHAN VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2015-9-7] [REFERRED TO]
MD ALI @ GUDDU VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(SC)-2015-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN LAL VS. STATE [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-11-140] [REFERRED TO]
LAL SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2003-8-88] [REFERRED]
RAJOO ALIAS RAJESH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-10-295] [REFERRED]
BABLU PASI VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-31] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-431] [REFERRED]
PREM RAJ VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-9-162] [REFERRED TO]
JAHANGIR @ GUDDU VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-5-217] [REFERRED TO]
BHALLU @ WASIUR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-3-343] [REFERRED TO]
ARJUN VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-3-357] [REFERRED TO]
ANANT RAM VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-169] [REFERRED TO]
LALLOO VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-9-290] [REFERRED TO]
MOTILAL YADAV VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(SC)-2014-11-87] [REFERRED TO]
AMARJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-2010-4-80] [REFERRED TO]
KALANDI CHARAN SAHU AND ORS. VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2016-1-44] [REFERRED TO]
GAUTAM PASI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2018-1-34] [REFERRED TO]
AMAR NATH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-356] [REFERRED TO]
SURAI NARAYAN JAISWAL @ KUKOO VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-403] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-608] [REFERRED TO]
AKHILESH KUMAR TRIVEDI @ SALLHAR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-3-55] [REFERRED TO]
SAGHEER AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2018-2-115] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM KUMAR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-9-405] [REFERRED]
JUDGEMENT
B. N. Agrawal, J. -
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)Judgment impugned in this appeal has been rendered by Jodhpur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court whereby criminal appeal preferred by the appellants has been dismissed confirming the convictions and sentences awarded against the appellants by the trial Court under Sections 326 and 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.)The said criminal appeal was filed in the year 1987 and duly admitted. The same was placed for hearing in the year 2001 and after hearing the parties, the High Court passed an order in four pages. The impugned judgment, runs into seven paragraphs and after referring to the prosecution case and defence version in paras 1 to 5, the Court has disposed of the appeal in two paragraphs which run thus :-
"6. After re-appreciation of the evidence and re-scrutiny of the record, I find that there is no error apparent in the finding recorded by the learned Judge, therefore, there is no reason to interfere in the order of conviction passed by the learned Judge.
7. In the result, therefore, the present appeal is dismissed."
(2.)Judgment impugned in this appeal has been rendered by Jodhpur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court whereby criminal appeal preferred by the appellants has been dismissed confirming the convictions and sentences awarded against the appellants by the trial Court under Sections 326 and 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.)The said criminal appeal was filed in the year 1987 and duly admitted. The same was placed for hearing in the year 2001 and after hearing the parties, the High Court passed an order in four pages. The impugned judgment, runs into seven paragraphs and after referring to the prosecution case and defence version in paras 1 to 5, the Court has disposed of the appeal in two paragraphs which run thus :-
"6. After re-appreciation of the evidence and re-scrutiny of the record, I find that there is no error apparent in the finding recorded by the learned Judge, therefore, there is no reason to interfere in the order of conviction passed by the learned Judge.
7. In the result, therefore, the present appeal is dismissed."
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.