REHMAT vs THE STATE HARYANA

The Supreme Court upheld the convictions under Sections 307 and 393 IPC, and Section 25 of the Arms Act read with Section 6 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985, affirming that the prosecution established the appellant's involvement in a violent incident where he fired upon the complainant. The Court found that the evidence presented, including the recovery of a country-made pistol and cartridges, corroborated the complainant's testimony. The appellant's defense of false implication and self-defense was rejected, leading to the dismissal of his appeal.