Man murdered by friend; accused tried to mislead police
Within two hours of the crime, police arrested the accused, Kisan Rajmangal Shah (20), a native of Bihar who currently works at a nursery in the city.
According to police officials, the accused made a call to the emergency helpline (Dial 112) at around 4:52 am, claiming that his friend had been attacked by four unidentified men on a motorcycle. He alleged that the attackers struck Yadav on the head with an iron rod before fleeing the scene.
Acting on the call, a team from the Kalepadal police outpost reached the spot and found Yadav lying in a pool of blood. He was rushed to a nearby hospital, where doctors declared him dead.
SPI Mansing Patil of Kalepadal police station said, 'We noticed inconsistencies in the accused's version. Upon reviewing CCTV footage from the area, we found no evidence supporting his claim. Under sustained interrogation, he confessed to killing Yadav following an argument during a liquor session.'
The police have arrested Shah and booked him for murder under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code. Further investigation is underway to determine the exact motive behind the killing.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
43 minutes ago
- NDTV
18 Years Later, 3 Get Life Imprisonment For Murder Of Politician's Son; 10 Acquitted
Thane: A court in Maharashtra's Thane district on Thursday sentenced three persons to life imprisonment in the case of murder of the son of a local NCP (SP) functionary 18 years ago, and acquitted 10 others. Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan court, PR Ashturkar, held that the prosecution successfully proved the charges against the three accused. The court in its order noted that charges against 10 others, including Shiv Sena functionary Mahesh Patil, have not not been proved. Hence, they were given the benefit of doubt and acquitted. The prosecution told the court that on April 10, 2007, the accused opened fire at Vijay Patil, son of local NCP (SP) leader Vandar Patil, and killed him inside the gram panchayat office at Golavli in Kalyan area of Maharashtra's Thane district. One person was also injured in the attack. The Manpada police then registered an FIR under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act against the accused. Additional public prosecutors Bamre Patil and Sachin Kulkarni urged the court to give maximum of punishment to the accused. The court convicted Vijay Bakane, Sunil Bhoir and Sajid Sheikh, and sentenced them to life imprisonment. As many as 24 prosecution witnesses were examined to prove the charges, said court constable AR Gogarkar who assisted the prosecution in the trial.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
SC criticises Allahabad HC for ignoring settled law on sentence suspension
New Delhi, The Supreme Court has once again expressed its displeasure with an order of the Allahabad High Court for failing to apply settled legal principles while rejecting a plea for suspension of sentence in a fixed-term conviction. SC criticises Allahabad HC for ignoring settled law on sentence suspension The observations from the top court came days after it pulled up an Allahabad High Court judge for allowing criminal proceedings in a civil dispute case. In an unprecedented order, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan on August 4 stripped criminal matters of the roster of a Allahabad High Court judge "till he demits office" after he "erroneously" upheld summons of criminal nature in a civil dispute. The same bench came hard on the high court decision in another case. "The impugned Order is one more from the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad with which we are disappointed," it said, adding that this plea arose from an order passed by the High Court on May 29, in a criminal appeal by which the high court declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence passed by the trial court. "We are once again constrained to observe that such errors creep in at the level of the High Court and only because the wellsettled principles of law on the subject are not applied correctly. "It is very important to first look into the subject-matter. Thereafter the court should look into the issue involved. In the last the court should look into the plea of the litigant and then proceed to apply the correct principles of law," Justice Pardiwala said in an order on August 6. The apex court observed that the High Court's order was legally flawed and demonstrated a disregard for established jurisprudence. It was hearing an appeal filed by a convict who had been sentenced to four years of rigorous imprisonment under various provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Indian Penal Code , and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The convict had approached the high court with an application under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking suspension of his sentence. However, the high court rejected the plea solely on the ground that the offence was "heinous", without evaluating the request in light of the settled law. Setting aside the high court's order, bench cited a landmark judgment which mandates that appellate courts should adopt a liberal approach in suspending fixed-term sentences unless exceptional circumstances exist. Emphasizing the need for judicial clarity, the bench said, "It is very important to first look into the subject matter. Thereafter, the court should examine the issues involved, and only then consider the plea of the litigant before applying the correct principles of law." The apex court took particular issue with the high court's failure to analyze the application on legal grounds. "What the high court did was to reiterate the prosecution's case and the oral evidence, without engaging with the legal test for suspension of sentence in a fixed-term conviction," the bench observed. It has now remanded the matter back to the high court for fresh consideration, directing it to pass an appropriate order within 15 days. "The High Court shall keep in mind that the sentence is for a fixed term, that is four years and it is only if there are compelling circumstances indicating that release would not be in public interest, that suspension may be denied," the order clarified. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
SC criticises Allahabad HC for ignoring settled law on sentence suspension
New Delhi, Aug 7 (PTI) The Supreme Court has once again expressed its displeasure with an order of the Allahabad High Court for failing to apply settled legal principles while rejecting a plea for suspension of sentence in a fixed-term conviction. The observations from the top court came days after it pulled up an Allahabad High Court judge for allowing criminal proceedings in a civil dispute case. In an unprecedented order, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan on August 4 stripped criminal matters of the roster of a Allahabad High Court judge 'till he demits office" after he 'erroneously" upheld summons of criminal nature in a civil dispute. The same bench came hard on the high court decision in another case. 'The impugned Order is one more from the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad with which we are disappointed," it said, adding that this plea arose from an order passed by the High Court on May 29, in a criminal appeal by which the high court declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence passed by the trial court. 'We are once again constrained to observe that such errors creep in at the level of the High Court and only because the wellsettled principles of law on the subject are not applied correctly. 'It is very important to first look into the subject-matter. Thereafter the court should look into the issue involved. In the last the court should look into the plea of the litigant and then proceed to apply the correct principles of law," Justice Pardiwala said in an order on August 6. The apex court observed that the High Court's order was legally flawed and demonstrated a disregard for established jurisprudence. It was hearing an appeal filed by a convict who had been sentenced to four years of rigorous imprisonment under various provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Indian Penal Code (IPC), and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The convict had approached the high court with an application under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking suspension of his sentence. However, the high court rejected the plea solely on the ground that the offence was 'heinous", without evaluating the request in light of the settled law. Setting aside the high court's order, bench cited a landmark judgment which mandates that appellate courts should adopt a liberal approach in suspending fixed-term sentences unless exceptional circumstances exist. Emphasizing the need for judicial clarity, the bench said, 'It is very important to first look into the subject matter. Thereafter, the court should examine the issues involved, and only then consider the plea of the litigant before applying the correct principles of law." The apex court took particular issue with the high court's failure to analyze the application on legal grounds. 'What the high court did was to reiterate the prosecution's case and the oral evidence, without engaging with the legal test for suspension of sentence in a fixed-term conviction," the bench observed. It has now remanded the matter back to the high court for fresh consideration, directing it to pass an appropriate order within 15 days. 'The High Court shall keep in mind that the sentence is for a fixed term, that is four years and it is only if there are compelling circumstances indicating that release would not be in public interest, that suspension may be denied," the order clarified. PTI SJK ZMN view comments First Published: August 07, 2025, 22:45 IST News agency-feeds SC criticises Allahabad HC for ignoring settled law on sentence suspension Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
