Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Judgments

Recent judgments citing this act

1. Kudula Srinivas vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 20 July, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jul 2023

   Case Name: Court: Date of Judgment: Bench: Subject: Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction under Section 304-II IPC requires sufficient evidence establishing the causal link between the assault and the death of the deceased. 2. Hostile testimony from key witnesses does not automatically invalidate the prosecution's case if corroborated by other credible evidence. 3. Courts retain the discretion to reduce sentences even upon upholding a conviction, considering the circumstances of the case and the period already undergone. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Kudula Srinivas, was convicted by the VI Additional Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, for the offence under Section 304-II of the IPC and sentenced to three years simple imprisonment. The conviction was based primarily on the testimony of P.W.4, an eyewitness, alleging that the appellant kicked the deceased, leading to his death following a property dispute. The appellant filed a Criminal Appeal challenging the conviction and a separate petition seeking suspension of the sentence pending appeal. Held: A. On Conviction under Section 304-II IPC: Majority View: The Court found no infirmity in the trial court’s conviction, noting

2. Danam Laxmareddy @ Danam Laxmappa vs Danam Mahesh & Ors. on 21 February, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana21 Feb 2023

   Case Name: Danam Laxmareddy @ Danam Laxmappa vs Danam Mahesh & Ors. on 21 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 21 February, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao Subject: Criminal Revision, Maintenance Petition, Lok Adalat Award, Interim Maintenance Key Legal Propositions 1. A compromise reached before a Lok Adalat, while generally akin to a civil court decree, does not automatically preclude a subsequent claim for maintenance if the original settlement did not explicitly address maintenance for minor children. 2. Courts have the discretion to grant interim maintenance to minor children, even after a previous settlement, if their needs are not adequately addressed by the prior agreement. 3. The scope of a Lok Adalat award is limited to the terms explicitly agreed upon by the parties; it does not operate as a comprehensive resolution of all potential claims. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Revision Case arises from an order passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kodangal, regarding a maintenance petition (M.C. No. 19 of 2015) filed on behalf of minor children. The petitioner/respondent (Danam Laxmareddy)

3. B. Ramana Rao vs The State of Telangana on 29 August, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana29 Aug 2023

   Case Name: Court: Date of Judgment: Bench: Subject: Key Legal Propositions 1. A petition under Section 482 CrPC can be withdrawn if the cause for adjudication no longer survives. 2. Courts have the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings that have become infructuous. 3. Dismissal of a criminal petition as infructuous results in the closure of any pending miscellaneous petitions related to it. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner filed a Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking to quash C.C.No.808 of 2013 pending before the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. Held: A. On Section 482 Cr.P.C. and Infructuousness of Petition: Majority View: The Court held that the petition had become infructuous as the cause for adjudication no longer existed. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as infructuous. Dissenting View: None. B. On Pending Miscellaneous Petitions: Majority View: Any miscellaneous petitions pending in connection with the criminal petition were directed to be closed. Dissenting View: None. C. On Adjudication of Criminal Proceedings: Majority View: The Court exercised its po

4. Gunti Sai Varun vs The State of Telangana on 08 September, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana8 Sept 2023

   Case Name: Gunti Sai Varun vs The State of Telangana on 08 September, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 08 September, 2023 Bench: K. Surender, J Subject: Criminal Law – Bail Application – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Procedure for seizure, inventory, and sampling of contraband – Compliance with Supreme Court guidelines. Key Legal Propositions 1. Delay in production of seized contraband before a Magistrate for certification of inventory and drawing of samples is detrimental to the prosecution and benefits the accused. 2. The procedure outlined in *Union of India v. Mohanlal* (2016) 3 SCC 379 regarding seizure, inventory, and sampling of contraband must be scrupulously followed. 3. Remand applications should explicitly reflect the production of contraband before the Magistrate and a request for permission to draw samples. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner sought regular bail under Sections 437 and 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 117 of 2023, registered for offences under Section 337 IPC and Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Th

5. Bellamkonda Suman vs The State of Telangana on 23 November, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana23 Nov 2023

   Case Name: Bellamkonda Suman vs The State of Telangana on 23 November, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 23 November, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Rape, Cheating, and Threatening Conduct Key Legal Propositions 1. Consent for sexual intercourse must be freely given and not based on a false promise of marriage to negate the offence of rape under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC. 2. Significant delays in reporting an offence, coupled with material inconsistencies between the initial complaint (Section 161 CrPC statement) and subsequent testimony, raise a strong suspicion of fabricated evidence. 3. Mere allegations of abuse without specific details are insufficient to establish an offence under Section 506 of the IPC. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant/accused filed a Criminal Appeal challenging a judgment of the Special Sessions Judge convicting him under Sections 376(2)(n), 420, and 506 of the IPC, based on a complaint alleging rape under the pretext of marriage, cheating, and threatening conduct. The complainant (P.W.1) alleged a six-year relationship with the appellant, during which he promis

6. Mohd. Baba S/o Rahman vs The State of A.P on 28 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana28 Jun 2023

   Case Name: Mohd. Baba vs The State of A.P on 28 June, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 28 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Electricity Theft – Bail Application – Evidence – Hostile Witnesses Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction based solely on the testimony of an interested witness and seizure without corroborating evidence is unsustainable. 2. The prosecution must establish a clear link between the seized material and the alleged theft, and mere possession is insufficient for conviction. 3. Hostility of crucial witnesses and lack of corroborating evidence create reasonable doubt, necessitating acquittal. Judgment Summary Background: The Appellant/Accused No.6 preferred a Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC against a judgment convicting him under Sections 136(1)(a) and 136(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003, for offences related to theft of aluminum wire. The prosecution alleged that the Appellant, along with others, was found in possession of 250 kgs of stolen aluminum wire. A petition was also filed seeking suspension of sentence and release on bail. All independent witnesses turned

7. E. Jogaraju vs The State of Telangana on 06 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Jun 2023

   Case Name: E. Jogaraju vs The State of Telangana on 06 June, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 06 June, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice G. Anupama Chakravarthy Subject: Criminal Law – Theft and Attempt to Cause Grievous Hurt Key Legal Propositions 1. Confessional statements made in police custody require careful scrutiny and corroboration, particularly when the circumstances surrounding the recovery of evidence are unclear. 2. Acquittal for a more serious charge (Section 307 IPC) necessitates extending the benefit of doubt for a lesser included offence (Section 394 IPC) based on the same set of facts and evidence. 3. Prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on solely the testimony of a single witness, particularly when contradicted by other evidence, is insufficient for conviction. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment dated 26.08.2021 of the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, convicting the appellant under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case involved allegations of theft and causing injuries to the complainant, P.W.3, who was the appell

8. The State of Telangana vs. Mankala Shiva Kumar on 30 October, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana30 Oct 2023

   Case Name: The State of Telangana vs. Mankala Shiva Kumar on 30 October, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 30 October, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Sri Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti Subject: Service Law – Cancellation of Provisional Selection – Suppression of Criminal History – Application of Supreme Court Guidelines Key Legal Propositions 1. Suppression of material facts in application/attestation forms can be grounds for disqualification from appointment. 2. Employers have discretion to consider cases of suppression, particularly when the concealed information relates to trivial offences or cases ending in acquittal. 3. Guidelines laid down in *Avtar Singh v. Union of India* must be considered when evaluating suppression of criminal history, and a rigid application of disqualification rules may be inappropriate. Judgment Summary Background: The Writ Appeal arises from a challenge to a Single Judge’s order setting aside the cancellation of the Respondent’s (Mankala Shiva Kumar) provisional selection as a Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable. The Respondent’s selection was initially cancelled due to non-

9. Dudepaka Chalapathi, @ Chalam & Domakonda Raju @ Raju vs The State on 31 July, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana31 Jul 2023

   Case Name: Dudepaka Chalapathi, @ Chalam & Domakonda Raju @ Raju vs The State on 31 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 31 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Attempt to Murder, Arms Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Credible eyewitness testimony, particularly from the injured witness, is sufficient to establish guilt even in the absence of corroborating evidence regarding motive. 2. A Test Identification Parade (TIP) is valid unless there is demonstrable irregularity in its procedure, and a bald statement by the accused regarding prior identification does not invalidate the proceedings. 3. A conviction based solely on the presence of an accused at the scene and possession of a weapon, without evidence of overt acts, is unsustainable, and benefit of doubt should be extended. Judgment Summary Background: The appellants were convicted for offences under Section 307 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), with A1 also convicted under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and A2 under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The case stemmed from an altercation where the appellants allegedly fired upon and injured P.W.2. The appel

10. Vandanam Chinna Balaiah vs The State of Telangana on 19 August, 2015

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana19 Aug 2015

    Case Name: Vandanam Chinna Balaiah vs The State of Telangana on 19 August, 2015 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 27 July, 2023 Bench: Justice K. Lakshman and Justice P. Sree Sudha Subject: Criminal Appeal – Murder Trial – Appreciation of Evidence – Delay in Complaint – Land Dispute – Eyewitness Testimony – Acquittal Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction based solely on inconsistent eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence is unsustainable. 2. Significant delays in lodging a complaint, coupled with police insistence on directing suspicion, raise doubts about the reliability of the prosecution's case. 3. Failure to investigate a crucial aspect of the alleged motive (land dispute) constitutes a serious lapse in investigation, impacting the credibility of the prosecution. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arises from a judgment dated 19.08.2015, convicting the Appellant/Accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of his brother, based on allegations of a land dispute. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony (P.W.6), recovery of a weapon (axe), and circumstantial evidence. The Appellant c

11. Gorre Naravana vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 20 June, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jun 2023

    Case Name: Gorre Naravana vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 20 June, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Rape (Section 376 IPC) – Identification of Accused – Test Identification Parade – Confession – Evidence Act Key Legal Propositions 1. In cases involving identification of an accused as a stranger, a Test Identification Parade (TIP) is crucial, and its absence creates doubt regarding the reliability of subsequent identification, especially after a significant delay. 2. A conviction cannot be solely based on identification made for the first time in court after a prolonged period, particularly when the initial complaint or FIR lacks specific descriptive details of the perpetrator. 3. An extra-judicial confession obtained under questionable circumstances (e.g., through coercion or from a non-credible source) is a weak piece of evidence and insufficient for conviction. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant was convicted by the VI Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad, for rape under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code. The pr

12. Vanguri Prashanth vs The State of Telangana on 22 August, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana22 Aug 2023

    Case Name: Vanguri Prashanth vs The State of Telangana on 22 August, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 22 August, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Procedure – Transfer of Criminal Proceedings – Withdrawal of Petition Key Legal Propositions 1. A petitioner may seek permission to withdraw a Transfer Criminal Petition. 2. Upon granting permission, the Court may dismiss the Transfer Criminal Petition as withdrawn. 3. The dismissal of a Transfer Criminal Petition results in the closure of any pending miscellaneous petitions related to it. Judgment Summary Background: The Petitioner filed a Transfer Criminal Petition under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking the transfer of S.C. No. 1574 of 2022 from the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge-Cum-MSJ-Cum-Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District to the XII Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad, for a joint trial with S.C. P.C. S. No. 104 of 2022. Held: A. On Withdrawal of Petition: Majority View: The Court granted the Petitioner’s request to withdraw the Transfer Criminal Petition, allowing them to file a fresh peti

13. Jeela Harish vs. The State of Telangana on 06 December, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Jeela Harish vs. The State of Telangana on 06 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 06 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Indian Penal Code, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Subsequent improvements in witness testimony, particularly regarding caste identification, are viewed with skepticism and cannot form the sole basis for conviction under the SC/ST (POA) Act. 2. Selective narration of events by witnesses, implicating only one accused while initially alleging involvement of multiple individuals, raises doubts about the credibility of the prosecution's case. 3. A single, isolated comment, while potentially offensive, may not warrant the full extent of punishment prescribed under the POCSO Act, justifying a reduction in sentence. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Jeela Harish, convicted under Sections 506, 509 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3(1)(w)(ii) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, and Section 12 of the POCSO Act, appealed the judgment of the IV Additional District and

14. Mohd Irhad vs State of A.P. on 30 June, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana30 Jun 2023

    Case Name: Mohd Irhad vs State of A.P. on 30 June, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 30 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Electricity Theft Key Legal Propositions 1. Evidence of tampering with electricity meters and bypassing wires is sufficient to establish guilt in cases of electricity theft. 2. Payment of assessed loss does not negate the conviction but may be a mitigating factor for sentence consideration. 3. Courts may exercise discretion to set aside sentences, particularly in older cases where the accused has no prior criminal record and the loss has been compensated. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment dated 15.04.2010 passed by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, convicting the appellant for electricity theft under APTS C.C. No. 1 of 2004. The prosecution alleged that the appellant tampered with the electricity meter at his flour mill, oil mill, and huller, causing a loss of Rs. 79,185/- to the A.P. Transco Department. The trial court convicted the appellant based on the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.8 and Exhibits P1 to P9. The appellant appealed

15. M/s. Visaka Industries Ltd. vs. The State of A.P. & Others on 04 July, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana4 Jul 2023

    Case Name: M/s. Visaka Industries Ltd. vs. The State of A.P. & Others on 04 July, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 04 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Negotiable Instruments Act - Section 138 - Dishonour of Cheque - Reversal of Acquittal - Burden of Proof - Outstanding Debt Key Legal Propositions 1. Once a cheque is issued, there is a presumption that it is for a legally enforceable debt, and the burden shifts to the accused to prove otherwise. 2. An appellate court should only interfere with a trial court’s acquittal order if there are “very substantial and compelling reasons” to do so, such as a palpably wrong finding of facts or an erroneous view of law. 3. If two reasonable views can be reached – one leading to acquittal and the other to conviction – the appellate court must rule in favour of the accused. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from the reversal of the conviction of the accused (a firm and its proprietor) by the Sessions Judge, which had initially been convicted by the Magistrate for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The case originated from c

16. Gandi Kondalu vs The State of A.P. on 20 July, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jul 2023

    Case Name: Gandi Kondalu vs The State of A.P. on 20 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 304 Part II IPC – Reduction of Sentence Key Legal Propositions 1. Eyewitness testimony, when consistent, can be relied upon to establish the facts of an incident, even in the absence of corroborating evidence. 2. A defense of accidental fall cannot be accepted when contradicted by credible eyewitness accounts. 3. Courts may exercise discretion to reduce sentences based on the specific circumstances of a case, even while upholding a conviction. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Gandi Kondalu, was convicted by the Principal Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, for the offence under Section 304-Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-. The appeal before the High Court challenged this conviction, arguing discrepancies in witness statements and claiming the death resulted from an accidental fall during a drunken state. The prosecution maintained the appellant inflicted blows on the deceased, leading to his

17. Chamakuri Dhanalaxmi & Anr. vs The State of Telangana on 09 November, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana9 Nov 2023

    Case Name: Chamakuri Dhanalaxmi & Anr. vs The State of Telangana on 09 November, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 09 November, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sentence Reduction - Intermediary Quantity - Mitigating Circumstances Key Legal Propositions 1. Sentencing under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 for possession of intermediary quantity of narcotics is subject to judicial discretion, with a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment. 2. Mitigating circumstances, such as first-time offenders, women with dependent children, and the socio-economic background of the accused, are relevant considerations for sentence reduction. 3. Courts possess the power to reduce sentences imposed by lower courts, particularly when the original sentence appears disproportionate to the offence and the specific circumstances of the accused. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, where the Appellants were sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh each for p

18. G. Gopala Krishna Reddy vs Akula Ananda Rao on 05 September, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana5 Sept 2023

    Case Name: G. Gopala Krishna Reddy vs Akula Ananda Rao on 05 September, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana Date of Judgment: 05 September, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Sarath Subject: Civil Appeal – Abatement of Appeal due to Death of Appellant Key Legal Propositions 1. An appeal can be dismissed as abated upon the death of the sole appellant. 2. Pending miscellaneous petitions are automatically dismissed upon the dismissal of the main appeal. 3. No costs are awarded in cases of appeals dismissed as abated. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal (C.C.C.A. No. 199 of 2002) was filed under Section 96 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) against a judgment dated 26-03-2002. The appellant submitted that the sole appellant had expired and requested the court to dismiss the appeal as abated. Held: A. On Abatement of Appeal: Majority View: The Court accepted the submission of the appellant and dismissed the appeal as abated due to the death of the sole appellant. Dissenting View: None. B. On Pending Miscellaneous Petitions: Majority View: The Court directed that any pending miscellaneous petitions be dismissed as a consequence of the dismissal of the main appeal. Dissenting Vi

19. Shaik Ilyas @ Mohd Ilyas vs Smt. Morampudi Sai Leela & Anr on 28 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana28 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Shaik Ilyas @ Mohd Ilyas vs Smt. Morampudi Sai Leela & Anr on 28 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 28 March, 2023 Bench: Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Accident Claims Appeal Key Legal Propositions 1. Appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act can be disposed of in terms of a Lok Adalat award. 2. Lok Adalat settlements are binding and result in the disposal of the appeal with no order as to costs. 3. Compromise settlements reached in Lok Adalat are enforceable and supersede prior tribunal orders. Judgment Summary Background: This is a Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (MACMA) filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging a decree and order dated 28 July 2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Nizamabad, in O.P. No. 785 of 2006. The appeal was settled during a Lok Adalat proceeding. Held: A. On Settlement via Lok Adalat: Majority View: The appeal was disposed of in terms of the award passed by the Lok Adalat dated 11 February 2023. No order as to costs was passed. Dissenting View: None. B. On Compensation Amount: Majority View: The Lok Adalat awar

20. N. Ashok Reddy vs The State of A-P on 27 April, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana27 Apr 2023

    Case Name: N. Ashok Reddy vs The State of A-P on 27 April, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 27 April, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice M. Laxman and Smt Justice G. Anupama Chakravarthy Subject: Criminal Appeal – Murder, Theft, and Evidence Key Legal Propositions 1. Circumstantial evidence, particularly the ‘last seen theory’, can be sufficient for conviction if the chain of circumstances is complete and points unequivocally to the guilt of the accused. 2. A short time gap between the last sighting of the accused and the deceased together and the discovery of the deceased’s body strengthens the ‘last seen theory’. 3. Corroborating evidence, such as recovery of the victim’s vehicle and the accused’s abscondance, can support a conviction based on circumstantial evidence. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment dated 17.01.2014, convicting the appellant, N. Ashok Reddy, for offences under Sections 302 (murder) and 201 (destruction of evidence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), stemming from the death of the deceased, with whom he had a financial dispute regarding a land sale. The prosecution’s case rested p

Search all 94,332 judgments →