BABU . vs STATE OF M.P. — Crl.A. No. 236/2006

Case under Section II-E. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010026452006

Filing Date

27-Jan-2006

Registration No

Crl.A. No. 236/2006

Diary Number

2645/2006

Order Date

20-May-2011

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Section II-E

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BABU .

    Adv. BINU TAMTA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF M.P.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-May-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 28-Jul-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 20-Apr-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 19-Mar-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 17-Feb-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 12-Aug-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 05-Jul-2006

    Judgment - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 13-Feb-2006

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 27-Jan-2006

    Case filed

    Registration No. Crl.A. No. 236/2006

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Crl.A. No. 236/2006 - BABU v. STATE OF M.P. Outcome: The Supreme Court dismissed the appellants' appeal on May 20, 2011, upholding their conviction under Section 302 IPC (murder) and life imprisonment sentence. Facts: Appellants were convicted for strangling a 13-14 year old boy on December 22, 2010, near Gharola Temple in Madhya Pradesh. Three independent witnesses testified the deceased was last seen with the appellants at a liquor shop and jalebi shop in the evening. Forensic examination of the deceased's pajama and appellants' underwears recovered through their disclosure revealed human blood and sperms, establishing the link to the crime. Reasoning: The Court rejected the appellants' argument that circumstantial evidence chain was broken, finding the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that: (1) deceased was in appellants' company the previous night; (2) death was homicidal by strangulation; and (3) forensic evidence connected appellants to the crime, which they failed to explain. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case