Skip to content


Bansi Lal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 104 of 1981
Judge
Reported in(1982)3SCC370
AppellantBansi Lal
RespondentState of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Excerpt:
.....-- constitution of india — articles 134 & 136 and 14 — same case different accused — where the co-accused in earlier appeal arising out of the same case had been acquitted, held, the appellant whose position was no different is also entitled to be acquitted — criminal trial -- it appears that in the same case in respect of two other accused this court acquitted those accused persons by an order dated october 3, 1980 in criminal appeal no. 35 of 1976. the appeal is accordingly allowed and the appellant acquitted. - the supreme court held that there was no reason to interfere with the conviction and the sentence and held that the offence really fell under section 302. the court held that the injuries caused was actually intended and that being so, the.....o. chinnappa reddy and; s. murtaza fazal ali, jj.1. it appears that in the same case in respect of two other accused this court acquitted those accused persons by an order dated october 3, 1980 in criminal appeal no. 35 of 1976. on perusal of the judgment referred to above we are satisfied that the case against the appellant as against the accused acquitted by this court is exactly the same and this court rejected the case of the prosecution in its entirety. there is thus no legal evidence to support the conviction. the appeal is accordingly allowed and the appellant acquitted. the appellant will be set at liberty forthwith and if he is on bail he will be discharged from bail.
Judgment:

O. Chinnappa Reddy and; S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, JJ.

1. It appears that in the same case in respect of two other accused this Court acquitted those accused persons by an Order dated October 3, 1980 in Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 1976. On perusal of the judgment referred to above we are satisfied that the case against the appellant as against the accused acquitted by this Court is exactly the same and this Court rejected the case of the prosecution in its entirety. There is thus no legal evidence to support the conviction. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the appellant acquitted. The appellant will be set at liberty forthwith and if he is on bail he will be discharged from bail.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //