SUDERSHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.
LAWS(SC)-2014-12-73
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on
December 18,2014
SUDERSHAN KUMAR
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF H.P.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
CHANDRAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]DHANAPAL VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
STATE OF U.P. VS. SANJAY YADAV [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-44] [REFERRED TO]STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. RANJEET VERMA [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-211] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. SURENDRA SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-226] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. BALISTER [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-338] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV BAHADUR RAM VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-51] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. GOKUL [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-409] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTER PRADESH VS. RAM PRATAP [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-209] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF C.G. VS. MURARI PRASAD GUPTA [LAWS(CHH)-2017-6-69] [REFERRED TO]
KHEMRAJ AGRAWAL VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, RAIGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2018-7-16] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. PUSHPENDRA GANGWAR [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-62] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. PARVEEN [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-386] [REFERRED TO]
RAM SHREE VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-10-139] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. MUKESH [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-33] [REFERRED TO]
GANESH RAM KASHYAP AND ORS. VS. STATE OF C.G. [LAWS(CHH)-2019-4-217] [REFERRED TO]
MALKIT SINGH @ MEETA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2015-3-149] [REFERRED TO]
GURMAIL SINGH VS. DAVINDER SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2023-9-22] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. WARELAL [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-47] [REFERRED TO]
WASIM AHMAD VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-54] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. RAJIV KUMAR SONKAR [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-165] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. RAM CHANDRA ALIAS CHHUTANKI [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-310] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SUNITA [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-351] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. MOHD. HARUN [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-213] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-11-121] [REFERRED TO]
R. ANDIAPPAN @ RAJASEKAR VS. STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AVUDAYARKOIL CIRCLE POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT (CRIME NO. 3/2015) [LAWS(MAD)-2016-8-188] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. CHANDRIKA PRASAD [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-314] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. SHYAM NARAIN SINGH @ MAKKAL SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-184] [REFERRED TO]
BHANU PRATAP SINGH YADAV VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-10-34] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. NIRMALA DEVI [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-423] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. KAMLESH [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-361] [REFERRED TO]
HARI SHANKAR VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-453] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. NAYEEM ZAFFAR [LAWS(KAR)-2023-2-495] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. VIKKI @ ANAND [LAWS(ALL)-2024-8-24] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. SHAHID [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-226] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. JAMSHED [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-376] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. SALEEM JHANJHI [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-290] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. KEHRI [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-382] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. MOHSEEN [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-187] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. DURGESH RAJBHAR [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-53] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. FATTESAB [LAWS(KAR)-2023-1-791] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. SASI [LAWS(KER)-2016-2-227] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. SANJIV KUMAR [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-306] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. HARISH [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-344] [REFERRED TO]
MUSTAFFA @ ASHRAF, S/O MOHAMMAD VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH NANJANGUD RURAL POLICE [LAWS(KAR)-2018-6-370] [REFERRED TO]
SUGARA VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-454] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. DAMODAR [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-82] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. PRAHLAD VARSHNEY [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-32] [REFERRED TO]
RAMJI SHARAN SHARMA VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-530] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. ANIL [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-417] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P VS. RUSTAM [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-553] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. RAVI SHAKYA [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-250] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. WASEEM [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-145] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH VS. ANITA [LAWS(CHH)-2017-8-112] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)These appeals arise out of common judgment dated May 03, 2011 rendered by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. The Appellants in these appeals were charge-sheeted and tried for offences punishable Under Sections 120-B, 409, 218 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'Indian Penal Code') as well as Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, 'PC Act'). They were arrayed as accused 1 to 4 (A-1 to A-4). After the trial, the learned Special Judge, Solan, acquitted all the four Appellants of the aforesaid charges, inasmuch as, as per his findings, the charges were not proved against these Appellants beyond reasonable doubt. The Respondent-State went in appeal challenging the aforesaid verdict of the Special Judge. The High Court, by impugned order, has upturned the decision of the Special Judge holding all the four Appellants as guilty of various offences under Indian Penal Code as well as the PC Act and convicted them as follows:
Special leave to appeal was granted by this Court on July 18, 2011 and July 22, 2011 respectively in the petitions filed by the Appellants. By the same orders, this Court suspended the sentence of the Appellants on certain terms. The Appellants are, accordingly, on bail.
(2.)The factual matrix which led to the charge of these Appellants, is succinctly narrated by the High Court with due clarity and, therefore, we are taking the facts from the said judgment, which led to the trial of these Appellants.
(3.)Appellant No. 1 Sudershan Kumar (hereinafter referred to as 'A-1) was working as In-charge of Himachal Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chambaghat (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'), a suburb of Solan town. Appellant No. 2 Ramesh Chand, s/o. Bhagwan Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'A-2'), was working as Helper in the aforesaid Corporation in the month of May 2003. Appellant No. 3 Pawan Kumar Sahni (hereinafter referred to as 'A-3') is the proprietor of flour mill, known as Giri Raj Atta Mill, at Deonghat, another suburb of Solan town. Appellant No. 4 Ramesh Chand-II, s/o. Sher Bahadur (hereinafter referred to as 'A-4') was employed as Munshi by A-3 for assisting him in the affairs of the aforesaid flour mill.
Special leave to appeal was granted by this Court on July 18, 2011 and July 22, 2011 respectively in the petitions filed by the Appellants. By the same orders, this Court suspended the sentence of the Appellants on certain terms. The Appellants are, accordingly, on bail.
(2.)The factual matrix which led to the charge of these Appellants, is succinctly narrated by the High Court with due clarity and, therefore, we are taking the facts from the said judgment, which led to the trial of these Appellants.
(3.)Appellant No. 1 Sudershan Kumar (hereinafter referred to as 'A-1) was working as In-charge of Himachal Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation, Chambaghat (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'), a suburb of Solan town. Appellant No. 2 Ramesh Chand, s/o. Bhagwan Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'A-2'), was working as Helper in the aforesaid Corporation in the month of May 2003. Appellant No. 3 Pawan Kumar Sahni (hereinafter referred to as 'A-3') is the proprietor of flour mill, known as Giri Raj Atta Mill, at Deonghat, another suburb of Solan town. Appellant No. 4 Ramesh Chand-II, s/o. Sher Bahadur (hereinafter referred to as 'A-4') was employed as Munshi by A-3 for assisting him in the affairs of the aforesaid flour mill.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.