Back National
By J. Venkatesan
A Bench, comprising Justice Y.K. Sabharwal and Justice H.K. Sema, admitted the SLP after hearing U.R. Lalit and K.K. Mani, counsel for Premananda, who prayed for quashing the judgment of the Madras High Court dated December 12, 2002, upholding the punishment awarded by the sessions court in 1997. Counsel argued that there had been misjoinder of charges as rape of all the girls had been rolled into one which was violative of the provisions of Cr.P.C. Further, every rape was a separate incident committed on different occasions and the allegations in reference to the date, time and place were not common. The SLP contended that the evidence obtained from the victim girls was taken contrary to the mandatory requirement of Sec. 160 Cr.P.C. and that their statements were not voluntary and had to be looked at with suspicion. There were contradictions in the evidence given by the girls. Regarding the murder charge, the SLP said there was an inordinate delay in reporting the murder and the prosecution theory was not improbable inasmuch as the alleged occurrence of beating and the consequential death of Ravi was a day-time incident and no other independent witnesses had been examined to prove the prosecution case.
© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu |