KALYAN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICATION [M.(Cr) P.N. 4020/2001] under section 389 (1), CrPC considered. Arguments heard.

(2.) IT is pointed out that in the seizure memos Exs. P -4 and P -5, it is not specifically mentioned that the alleged brown sugar was seized from the trouser. (pant) of the appellant. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that this case is akin to the decision of the Supreme Court. in Bhola Ram Kushwaha v. State of Madhya. Pradesh (AIR 2001 SC 229). In this case also, the panch witnesses have not supported the prosecution case.

(3.) C .C. as per rules.