2018 (8) TMI 2147

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntrao Katneshwarkar, AOR, Ms. Deepa M. Kulkarni, Adv., Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv., Mr. D.N. Ray, Adv., Mr. Ajit More, Adv., Mr. Lokesh K. Choudhary, Adv., Mr. Dillip Kumar Nayak, Adv., Ms. Shabeena Anjum, Adv., Ms. Amna Darakshan, Adv., Mr. Vinodh Kanna B., AOR, Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR, Ms. Deepa M. Kulkarni, Adv., Ms. Indira Jaising, Sr. Adv., Mr. Pradeep Rai, Sr. Adv., Mr. Vinay Vats, Adv., Ms. Sangeeta Madan, Adv., Mr. Vinod Gupta, Adv., Mr. Nishanth Patil, AOR. ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. The trial Court had refused to discharge the accused who were facing a charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court while exercising its revisional power overturned the verdict and thought it proper to orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....part from Suresh Bijlani and Anurag Garg, by three other persons namely Shri Sumeet Bacchewar, Shri S.P. Agarwal and Shri Bhupesh Prakashchand Gupta (respondents-accused). 5. The High Court in the impugned order has observed that the statement made by the appellant appears to be calculated and does not indicate trustworthiness in comparison to the statements made by the person who took him in the auto rickshaw and by the employee i.e. Satyendra. 6. Appreciation of evidence is an exercise that the High Court, in our considered view, could not have undertaken at this stage of consideration of the application for discharge. But this is what precisely what High Court appears to have been done. 7. Ms. Indira Jaising in support of her contenti....