The prosecution story in a nutshell is that the deceased – Om Prakash was on visiting terms with the present appellant/ accused- Ram Pratap. The learned trial Court relying upon the evidence of PW-4, PW-7 and PW-8 held that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt against the present appellant. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – State submitted that the High Court as well as the trial court have grossly erred in convicting the appellant when there is no 4 evidence worth the namesake. In the present case, if the evidence of Jagdish Chander (PW – 4) is to be appreciated wherein he has stated that the accused came to his house and informed him that he has killed the deceased-Om Prakash, such statement does not find any mention in the oral report. In that view of the matter, we find that the High Court as well as the trial court were not justified in convicting the appellant.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/remand-of-writ-petition-for-restoration-and-decision-on-merits/
Case Title: RAM PARTAP Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA (2022 INSC 1239)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000804-000804 / 2011
