Skip to content


Naba Parray and ors. Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 573 of 1976
Judge
Reported inAIR1982SC1200; 1982CriLJ1576
ActsJammu and Kashmir Criminal Procedure (CPC) - Sections 342
AppellantNaba Parray and ors.
RespondentState of Jammu and Kashmir
Excerpt:
criminal - acquittal - section 148 of ranbir procedure code, 1989smvt., sections 342 and 423 of jammu and kashmir criminal procedure, 1989 smvt. and sections 313 and 386 of criminal procedure code, 1974 - high court reversed trial court order and convicted accused - high court neither considered prosecution evidence nor evidence against individual accused properly - nothing on record to prove common object of unlawful assembly - accused not examined under section 342 - in such circumstances conviction untenable. - .....that the accused had not been examined under section 342 of the jammu & kashmir criminal p. c. in the face of these infirmities it is impossible to uphold the judgment of the high court. in the ordinary course we should have remanded the matter back to the high court for fresh disposal of the appeal. but having regard to the passage of time and the fact that the injuries caused to the complainant are of a simple nature, we do not think it is worthwhile doing so. the appellants are acquitted and their bail bonds are cancelled.
Judgment:

O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.

1. We are unable to sustain the judgment of the High Court setting aside the order of acquittal passed by the, trial Court. The evidence of the prosecution witnesses has not been discussed at all nor has the case against each of the individual accused been considered. The conviction is under Section 148, I.P.C. There is not even a finding about the common object of the unlawful assembly. The learned Judges of the High Court have themselves noticed that the accused had not been examined under Section 342 of the Jammu & Kashmir Criminal P. C. In the face of these infirmities it is impossible to uphold the judgment of the High Court. In the ordinary course we should have remanded the matter back to the High Court for fresh disposal of the appeal. But having regard to the passage of time and the fact that the injuries caused to the complainant are of a simple nature, we do not think it is worthwhile doing so. The appellants are acquitted and their bail bonds are cancelled.


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