Application for suspension of sentence and bail rejected by High Court Nagpur as trial findings were not perverse, invoking Sidharth Vashisht guidelines.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1/2
1704appa111.14.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 111 OF 2014 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 305 OF 2013
(Umesh s/o Vishwanath Nagdeve Vs. The State of Maharashtra)
Shri Shyam Dewani, Advocate for the applicant. Shri S. S. Doifode, A.P.P. for the respondent.
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND
C. V. BHADANG, JJ. DATED : 17th APRIL, 2014
1704appa111.14.odt 2/2 trial Judge has himself misled the evidence insofar as the evidence of P.W.-4 Ajay Neware is concerned. 5. As of now, there is an order passed by the learned trial Judge upon finding the guilt of the accused on conclusion of the evidence . 6. At this stage, it would not be appropriate for us to scan the evidence in minute weightage. The only consideration that will have to be weighed is, as to whether the prima facie findings of the learned trial Judge are perverse or not. 7. A reference in this respect could be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sidharth Vashisht @ Manu Sharma Vs. The State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) reported at 2008 (5) SCC – 230 . 8. In that view of the matter, prima facie, we do not find that the findings recorded by the learned trial Judge are perverse or impossible. The application deserves to be rejected and the same is rejected. 9. Needless to mention that the observations made herein above would not be taken into consideration at the stage of hearing of this appeal.
JUDGE JUDGE
wwl
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prima facie findings of guilt recorded by the trial Judge are perverse or impossible.
Whether the present application for suspension of sentence and bail deserves to be allowed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sidharth Vashisht @ Manu SharmaReferred¶7
Sidharth Vashisht @ Manu Sharma Vs. The State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) 2008 (5) SCC – 230 · Who else cites this
Umesh s/o Vishwanath Nagdeve
The State of Maharashtra
B. R. Gavai
C. V. Bhadang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
