evidence let in by the prosecution
properly the Trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellant.
According to her, the prosecution has failed to prove that ... Dowry Prohibition Act, the Sessions
Judge has wrongly convicted the appellant. She further
contends that even though there is no corroboration in the
evidence
their common intention to do
away with the life of Chandrappa,
wrongfully restrained him in Yedehalli
village and thereby committed an offence ... ingredient
of Sec.302 IPC and that the Sessions Court has
wrongly convicted the accused for the offence
under Sec.302 IPC. According
namely
skull and brain. His only contention is that appellant is
wrongly convicted on account of perverse appreciation
of evidence led in by the prosecution ... perverse and on
account of the same, the appellant is wrongly convicted
and sentenced. Hence we pass the following:-
ORDER
The appeal is allowed
Judge without examining the evidence
let in by the prosecution has wrongly convicted A2. In
the circumstances, he requests the court to allow the
appeal ... Judge without appreciating the evidence let in by the
prosecution has wrongly convicted the accused persons.
As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel
merely
because, death of Ramesh as homicidal, the appellant
has been wrongly convicted. In the circumstances, he
requests the Court to re-appreciate the entire
Chikkaiah without assigning any cogent reasons, the
appellant has been wrongly convicted because even
according to the case of the prosecution there was no
enmity
negative and accordingly, the appellants are convicted and
sentenced as aforesaid for the said offences. Challenging
7
the judgment of conviction and the order ... Judge is perverse and on
account of wrong appreciation of the evidence, the
appellants have been convicted. According to him, the
incident is said
appreciating the evidence properly and on account of
the wrong appreciation, the appellant has been
convicted erroneously by the Sessions Court. It is his
case ... believed by
the court and based on wrong appreciation of evidence
of PW6, the appellant has been convicted. According to
him, the Sessions Court
were held in the affirmative. Accordingly, the
appellant/accused has been convicted and sentenced as
8
aforesaid. This judgment of conviction and order of
sentence ... case that on account of wrong
appreciation of the evidence of PWs 5 to 8 the appellant
has been convicted. Therefore, he requests the court
without appreciating
the evidence in its right perspective has come to a
wrong conclusion in holding that the prosecution has
established the charge against them ... impugned Judgment and
order of the Trial Judge in so far as convicting and
sentencing the appellants/accused calls for interference
and the acquittal
