Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.46 seconds)
Babu Laxman Kalemule vs The State Of Maharashtra on 23 April, 2018 cites

State Of U.P vs Kishan Chand & Ors on 20 August, 2004

Principles of appreciation of evidence of the injured witness can be found in the judgment of the Honourable Apex Court in the matter of Shivalingappa supra as well as State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Kishan Chand3. It is well settled that deposition of the injured witness should be relied upon unless there are strong grounds for rejection of his evidence on the basis of major contradictions and discrepancies. The fact that the witness sustained injuries at the time and place of the incident lends support to his testimony that he was present during the occurrence. In the natural course, such injured witness does not 3 2004 (7) SCC 629 avk 9/20 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2018 01:59:20 ::: 202-APPEAL-772-2015-J.doc spare the real culprit and rope in an innocent. Let us, therefore, examine what PW1 Prabhu Sankole has stated in his evidence. In tune with prosecution case, injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole has stated that he belongs to Puriyajang community and his father, at the relevant time, was leading the community. Accused no.3 Shivaji Kalemule was aggrieved by this fact. Similarly, appellant/accused Babu Kalemule and his father were also picking up quarrels with his father in order to make father of appellant/accused Babu Kalemule as leader of this community. PW1 Prabhu Sankole testified that on 12 th January 2012, when he was standing in front of his house at about 7.00 p.m., appellant/accused no.1 Babu Kalemule along with accused no.2 Mogallappa, accused no.3 Shivaji and absconding accused Karappa came there and started abusing his father and sister in filthy language. He, therefore, tried to pacify the accused persons. His father also tried to stop the accused persons from abusing them. At that time, as per version of injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole, the appellant/accused no.1 Babu Kalemule uttered that injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole and his family members need to be avk 10/20 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2018 01:59:20 ::: 202-APPEAL-772-2015-J.doc taught a lesson. Then accused no.3 Shivaji gave a fist blow on face of PW1 Prabhu Sankole. As stated by injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole, then he was held by absconding accused Karappa and accused no.2 Mogallappa, and thereupon, appellant/accused no.1 Babu Kalemule stabbed him by knife on his back as well as chest and abdomen. He was, then, thrown on the ground and all accused persons thereafter, assaulted him by means of fist and kick blows.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 334 - Full Document

Shivalingappa Kallayanappa And Others vs State Of Karnataka on 31 August, 1994

Principles of appreciation of evidence of the injured witness can be found in the judgment of the Honourable Apex Court in the matter of Shivalingappa supra as well as State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Kishan Chand3. It is well settled that deposition of the injured witness should be relied upon unless there are strong grounds for rejection of his evidence on the basis of major contradictions and discrepancies. The fact that the witness sustained injuries at the time and place of the incident lends support to his testimony that he was present during the occurrence. In the natural course, such injured witness does not 3 2004 (7) SCC 629 avk 9/20 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2018 01:59:20 ::: 202-APPEAL-772-2015-J.doc spare the real culprit and rope in an innocent. Let us, therefore, examine what PW1 Prabhu Sankole has stated in his evidence. In tune with prosecution case, injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole has stated that he belongs to Puriyajang community and his father, at the relevant time, was leading the community. Accused no.3 Shivaji Kalemule was aggrieved by this fact. Similarly, appellant/accused Babu Kalemule and his father were also picking up quarrels with his father in order to make father of appellant/accused Babu Kalemule as leader of this community. PW1 Prabhu Sankole testified that on 12 th January 2012, when he was standing in front of his house at about 7.00 p.m., appellant/accused no.1 Babu Kalemule along with accused no.2 Mogallappa, accused no.3 Shivaji and absconding accused Karappa came there and started abusing his father and sister in filthy language. He, therefore, tried to pacify the accused persons. His father also tried to stop the accused persons from abusing them. At that time, as per version of injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole, the appellant/accused no.1 Babu Kalemule uttered that injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole and his family members need to be avk 10/20 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2018 01:59:20 ::: 202-APPEAL-772-2015-J.doc taught a lesson. Then accused no.3 Shivaji gave a fist blow on face of PW1 Prabhu Sankole. As stated by injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole, then he was held by absconding accused Karappa and accused no.2 Mogallappa, and thereupon, appellant/accused no.1 Babu Kalemule stabbed him by knife on his back as well as chest and abdomen. He was, then, thrown on the ground and all accused persons thereafter, assaulted him by means of fist and kick blows.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 244 - M M Punchhi - Full Document

Roshni Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 July, 2017

The learned APP by relying on the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the matter of Guddu alias Sameer vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2 argued that the prosecution has made out the offence punishable under Section 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code as injuries 1 1994 Supp(3) SCC 235 2 2012 CRI.L.J. 3866 avk 8/20 ::: Uploaded on - 24/04/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2018 01:59:20 ::: 202-APPEAL-772-2015-J.doc caused to PW1 Prabhu Sankole were by means of forceful blows of knife causing laceration of the kidney. The overt act coupled with intention is, as such, made out by the prosecution. 5 I have carefully considered the rival submissions and also perused the Record and Proceedings including the deposition of prosecution witnesses as well as the documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution. The case in hand is a case of assault by means of knife on injured PW1 Prabhu Sankole by accused persons.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 144 - Full Document
1