Mahesh v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court allowed two criminal appeals regarding conviction and sentence under Section 304 Part-II IPC. The Trial Court Record was lost and unreconstructable. Relying on precedents and Article 21, the Court held that perusal of the record is essential for conviction and set aside the impugned judgment and sentence orders.
What did the court decide?
The judgment of conviction dated 20.10.2003 and order of sentence dated 23.10.2003 set aside.
What the court decided
$~43
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 03.01.2024
- CRL.A. 741/2003 RAMESH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg and Ms.Kavita Agrawal, Advocates.
versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for State with SI Ravi Saini, NR-II Crime Branch
AND
- CRL.A. 719/2003 MAHESH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Ashok Kr. Garg, Ms. Kavita Agrawal & Mr. Sanjay Rana, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for the State with SI Sukhvinder Singh, P.S. Crime Branch, NR-II.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
JUDGMENT
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J.
CRL.A. 741/2003
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an criminal appeal can be heard when the Trial Court Record is lost and cannot be reconstructed.
Whether set-aside of a conviction order is justified when material documents and witness depositions are unavailable.
Whether non-compliance with Section 385 CrPC due to loss of records violates Article 21 of the Constitution.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ramesh & Anr.
- appellant
Mahesh & Anr.
- respondent
State of NCT of Delhi
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court