Supreme Court - Daily Orders
State Of Karnataka vs Prashant @ Papya on 26 November, 2015
Bench: Pinaki Chandra Ghose, R.K. Agrawal
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.333 OF 2014
STATE OF KARNATAKA Appellant(s)
VERSUS
PRASHANT @ PAPYA & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1) Being aggrieved with the judgment and order dated 26.08.2008 passed by the High Court, this appeal has been filed by the State of Karnataka challenging the acquittal of the respondents for the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
2) We have gone through the facts of the case and it appears that the High Court has dealt with the matter without taking into account all the facts in question and further we find that the High Court has not correctly analyzed the evidence which was deposed on behalf of the prosecution.
3) We also find that although there is evidence of recovery, the High Court did not take any notice of that fact in coming to the conclusion in question and the circumstances which also led the trial Court to come to the conclusion and to pass an order convicting the accused.
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by Gulshan Kumar Arora 4) Date: 2015.12.01 15:55:07 IST The High Court ignored all the facts which were duly dealt Reason: with by the trial Court and it appears that the High Court without dealing with the same and without giving any cogent reasons 2 allowed the appeal thereby acquitting accused-respondents.
5) In our opinion, the High Court has failed to decide the questions which were placed before it and further on the wrong notion the High Court has allowed the appeal.
6) In these circumstances, we find that the judgment and order dated 26.08.2008 passed by the High Court without giving any cogent reasons thereof is not sustainable in the eye of law and hence the same is set aside. Therefore, we remand the matter back to the High Court with a request to dispose of the appeal within a period of six months from the date of receiving of this order.
7) We further direct the Registry to send all the papers related to this case as expeditiously as possible to the High Court. Keeping in view the fact that the incident had taken place in the year 1996 and we have set aside the judgment, we direct the concerned Court/Authorities that the accused be taken into custody forthwith until the appeal is decided. However, the accused shall be at liberty to move an application for bail before the High Court.
8) The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
…....................J. [PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE] …....................J. [R.K. AGRAWAL] NEW DELHI;
NOVEMBER 26, 2015
3
ITEM NO.118 COURT NO.13 SECTION IIB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 333/2014
STATE OF KARNATAKA Appellant(s)
VERSUS
PRASHANT @ PAPYA & ORS Respondent(s)
(with office report)
Date : 26/11/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Appellant(s) Ms. Anitha Shenoy, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale, AOR (N.P.) Mr. Vijay Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(R.NATARAJAN) (SNEH LATA SHARMA)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file)