ARVIND ALIAS CHHOTU Vs. STATE
LAWS(DLH)-2009-8-172
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on
August 10,2009
ARVIND ALIAS CHHOTU
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SHYAM BEHARI AND ANR. [REFERRED TO]DEONANDAN MISHRA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
ANANT BHUJANGRAO KULKARNI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. MIRA MOHAMMAD OMAR [REFERRED TO]
MOHIBUR RAHMAN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]
BODH RAJ VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
BABU S O RAVEENDRAN VS. BABU S O BAHULEYAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. SATISH [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK CHANDRAKANT PATIL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. DESH RAJ [REFERRED TO]
RAMREDDY RAJESHKHANNA REDDY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GOA VS. SANJAY THAKRAN [REFERRED TO]
VENKATESAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
VITHAL EKNATH ADLINGE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)THE above captioned four appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment and order; not for the reason all appeals arise out of a common judgment, but on account of the fact that issue of law which arise for consideration in the appeals is the same.
(2.)IN Crl. A. No. 362/2001 and Crl. A. No. 236/2003, the impugned judgment and order is dated 9. 10. 2000. The impugned judgment and order in Crl. A. No. 366/2001 and crl. A. No. 490/2001 is dated 15. 7. 2000.
(3.)ON the solitary evidence, of being last seen in the company of the deceased, the appellants have been convicted.
(2.)IN Crl. A. No. 362/2001 and Crl. A. No. 236/2003, the impugned judgment and order is dated 9. 10. 2000. The impugned judgment and order in Crl. A. No. 366/2001 and crl. A. No. 490/2001 is dated 15. 7. 2000.
(3.)ON the solitary evidence, of being last seen in the company of the deceased, the appellants have been convicted.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.