Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 107 views

    Rough Draft of Law of Evidence 4 Sem

    Uploaded by

    Rahul Barnwal
    This document summarizes the Ganesh K. Gulve Etc vs State Of Maharashtra case. It discusses that 60 people were tried for various offenses in Sessions Court. 13 people were convicted of offenses like murder and attempt to murder. Ganesh Gulve challenged his conviction in High Court, which upheld it. He then appealed to the Supreme Court. The document outlines the aims, research questions, proposed chapter structure, limitations, and bibliography for further analyzing this case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rough Draft of Law of Evidence 4 Sem

    Uploaded by

    Rahul Barnwal
    107 views2 pages
    This document summarizes the Ganesh K. Gulve Etc vs State Of Maharashtra case. It discusses that 60 people were tried for various offenses in Sessions Court. 13 people were convicted of offenses like murder and attempt to murder. Ganesh Gulve challenged his conviction in High Court, which upheld it. He then appealed to the Supreme Court. The document outlines the aims, research questions, proposed chapter structure, limitations, and bibliography for further analyzing this case.

    Original Title

    rough draft of law of evidence 4 sem

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes the Ganesh K. Gulve Etc vs State Of Maharashtra case. It discusses that 60 people were tried for various offenses in Sessions Court. 13 people were convicted of offenses like murder and attempt to murder. Ganesh Gulve challenged his conviction in High Court, which upheld it. He then appealed to the Supreme Court. The document outlines the aims, research questions, proposed chapter structure, limitations, and bibliography for further analyzing this case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    107 views2 pages

    Rough Draft of Law of Evidence 4 Sem

    Uploaded by

    Rahul Barnwal
    This document summarizes the Ganesh K. Gulve Etc vs State Of Maharashtra case. It discusses that 60 people were tried for various offenses in Sessions Court. 13 people were convicted of offenses like murder and attempt to murder. Ganesh Gulve challenged his conviction in High Court, which upheld it. He then appealed to the Supreme Court. The document outlines the aims, research questions, proposed chapter structure, limitations, and bibliography for further analyzing this case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Ganesh K.

    Gulve Etc vs State Of Maharashtra

    INTRODUCTION
    Ganesh K. Gulve etc. versus State of Maharashtra was decided on 21 August 2002
    at Supreme Court of India by THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE Y.K. SABHARWAL &
    THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE H.K. SEMA and it was Criminal Appeal No. 501 of
    1999 (With Crl. A. Nos. 324 of 2000, 156, 158, 159-161 of 2002).
    Criminal Appeal No. 501 of 1999 is a statutory appeal. It has been filed by Ganesh K. Gulve
    challenging the judgment and order of the High Court dated 25.2.1999 setting aside the
    judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court in his favour. The High Court has held him
    guilty for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307 and 452 read with Section
    149 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
    Criminal Appeal Nos. 324 of 2000, 156, 158 and 159-161 of 2002 have been filed by accused
    challenging the judgment and order of the High Court confirming their conviction and
    sentence imposed by the trial court.
    For commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 324, 326,
    452 and 34 IPC and certain other offences, 60 accused persons were tried in the Sessions
    Court. The trial court convicted 13 of them for offences punishable under Sections 147, 302
    read with Section 149, Sections 149 and 307 read with Section 149 and Section 452 read with
    Section 149 IPC. They are: accused No.20 Ramchandra Krishna Kamble, accused No.21
    Bhawan @ Dharmaji Krishna Kamble, accused No.22 Narhari Krishna Kamble, accused
    No.23 Pandurang Krishna Kamble, accused No. 25 Babu Sopan Mandade, accused No. 27
    Namdev Pandurang Kamble, accused No. 28 Venkati Govind Yenjane, accused No. 36
    Madan Kerba Jagtap, accused No. 44 Rukhmaji Babarao Jagtap, accused No. 49 Shivaji
    Kerba Jagtap, accused No. 50 Ashok Dattarao Jagtap, accused No. 52 Uttam Chandrabhan
    Jagtap and accused No. 53 Shesherao Tukaram Kodale. Imprisonment for life was imposed
    on them for offence under Section 149 read with Section 302 IPC besides payment of fine
    and imprisonment in case of default in payment of fine as also varied punishments in
    respect of other offences.

    AIMS & OBJECTIVES


     The researcher intends to study and analyse the case.
     The researcher intends to analyse the laws related to procedural law.
     The researcher aims to study how evidence is appreciated in the court of law.

    RESEARCH
     Does India need a Uniform Civil QUESTIONS
    Code?
     Whether the judgement passed by the trial court is biased.
     Whether the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is
    reliable.

    TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION
    1|Page
    Ganesh K. Gulve Etc vs State Of Maharashtra

    1. Introduction of the case (Facts)


    2. Relevant provisions of I.P.C
    3. Relevant provisions of Cr.P.C
    4. Relevant provisions of Law of Evidence
    5. Relevant cases
    6. Analysis with case comment
    7. Conclusion & Suggestions

    LIMITATIONS of the study

    This project is limited to the subject and issues of the case that is to be reviewed. Various
    other cases have been referred to for supporting the arguments stronger. Relevant parts of the
    judgement have been extracted. All the works and cases referred in this paper have been
    properly cited and are related to the case.

    BIBLIOGRAPHY
    The researcher has consulted following sources to complete the rough proposal:
    (i) Constitution Of India, 1950
    (ii) SCC ONLINE
    (iii) MANUPATRA
    (iv) INDIAN KANOON

    2|Page

    You might also like