THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE vs KALLA JATAV — Crl.A. No. 1355/2011
Case under Section II-E. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010222422010
Filing Date
19-Jul-2010
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 1355/2011
Diary Number
22242/2010
Order Date
10-Oct-2017
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 06-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE
Adv. C. D. SINGH (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Respondent(s)
-
1.KALLA JATAV
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Oct-2017
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Oct-2017
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amitava Roy
-
21-Sep-2017
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
-
20-Sep-2017
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
-
19-Sep-2017
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
-
07-Sep-2017
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
-
31-Aug-2017
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Aug-2017
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
-
24-Aug-2017
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Aug-2017
Ordinary
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C. Pant
-
23-Aug-2017
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Feb-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
19-Jul-2010
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.A. No. 1355/2011
Summary: Crl.A. No. 001355/2011 - State of Madhya Pradesh v. Kalla Jatav The Supreme Court dismissed the State's appeal on October 10, 2017, upholding the High Court's acquittal of Kalla Jatav. Accused of burning his wife to death (Sections 302 and 436, IPC), Jatav was initially convicted by the trial court but acquitted by the High Court. The Supreme Court found the prosecution's circumstantial evidence unreliable due to contradictory witness statements, lack of credible eyewitnesses, and failure to establish motive, entitling the accused to the benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts