196	DEVINDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA	Coram: M.K.MUKHERJEE, S.P.KURDUKAR	13/09/1996	Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 302 : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 157-Circumstances for benefit of doubt-Non-disclosure of the names of the accused at the earliest opportunity-Delay in sending the special report to the Magistrate-B	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. Though apparently there is no reason to disbelieve the two eye witnesses, yet there are certain underlying circumstances due to which, benefit of reasonable doubt can be given to the appellant. [253-B;	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
197	KESHUB MAHINDRA Vs. STATE OF M.P,	Coram: AM. AHMADI, CJI , S.B. MAJMUDAR	13/09/1996	Criminal Law: Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Sections 227, 228, 391 and 482. Criminal Proceedings-Quashing of-Bhopal Gas Tragedy-Leakage of highly toxic MIC gas from storage tank of plant resulting in huge loss of human lives- Permanent/temp	Allowing the appeal in part, this Court HELD : 1. It is clear from Sections 227 and 228 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr. P.C. when the High Court is called upon to quash the charge pur	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
198	GRIDHARI PARAMANAND VADHAVA ETC, Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA	Coram: G.N. RAY , G.B. PATTANAIK	23/09/1996	Indian Penal Code 1860-Sections 302/120-B and 120-B-Brutal Mur-der of an innocent young school boy-kidnapped and held for ransom by the accused- Demand for Rs. 2 lacs-Consented and assured by the victim's family-Victim subjected to physical and me	Dismissing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. It has been clearly proved by PW3 and PW5 that all the accused including A3 had taken part in killing V after holding him for ransom and attempting to realise money from his family. From his evidence	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
199	PERIASAMI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU	Coram: THOMAS K.T. (J)	25/09/1996	Criminal Law : Evidence Act, 1872 : Sections 101 and 105. Burden of Proof-Benefit of general exception-Right to private defence- Availing of-Held : Initial burden on prosecution to prove that accused committed the offence charged against-Pres	Disposing of the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. Section 105 of the Evidence Act, 1872 prescribes a rule of burden of proof. The burden is on the accused to prove the existence of circumstances bringing his case within any of the exceptions and the	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
200	SURJA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN	Coram: RAY, G.N. (J)	25/09/1996	Indian Penal Code, 1960 : Ss. 302 and 307-Accused committed murder of his brother, brother's two minor sons and his aunt-Attempted to commit murder of his brother's wife and daughter-Attack by accused, in cool and calculated manner, in dead hou	Dismissing the appeal and the jail petition, this Court Held : 1.1. It has been indicated by the trial court that the accused was in full senses and had committed the murders of four close relations one after the other and also attempted to comm	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
201	PARAMJIT & ANR. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA	Coram: A.S. ANAND, K.T. THOMAS	26/09/1996	Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302 and 299 Expl.2-Murder-In-tention- Injuries caused on vital parts of the body with a sharp edged knife-Dying declaration narrating not only about motive but also about the manner in which the assault was committ	Dismissing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1. Appellant 1 had the requisite intention to commit the murder of the deceased and his offence, therefore, would squarely fall under Section 302 IPC, as rightly held by the trial court. [17-C] 2. Appe	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
202	STATE OF ORISSA Vs. SHARAT CHANDRA SAHU & ANR.	Coram: KULDIP SINGH, S. SAGHIR AHMAD	08/10/1996	Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Ss. 494 and 498A--Bigamy and dowry harassment-Women's Commis-sion sending the complaint of wife to police-Case against the husband for offences under ss. 494 and 498A registered and Charge-Sheet filed-Sub Divisional Ma	Held, High Court erred in quashing the charge-Judgment of High Court to that extent is set aside-Magistrate would proceed with the case. Held, if the facts reported to the police disclose both cognizable and non- cognizable offences the police w	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
203	GODABARISH MISHRA Vs. KUNTALA MISHRA AND ANOTHER	Coram: G.N. RAY, B.L. HANSARIA	24/10/1996	Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 302-Murder by strangula-tion-Deceased under influence of anaesthesia-No contrivance at the place of incident-ApparreI of the deceased intact-Motive against accused proved-Accused alone with the deceased in a room-No	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. The circumstantial evidence in this case are absolutely clinching in establishing the complicity of the accused in committing the murder of the deceased. The view taken by the High Court is clearly aga	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
204	STATE OF U.P ETC. Vs. BAL KISHAN DAS & ANR.	Coram: M.K. MUKHERJEE, S.P. KURDUKAR	29/10/1996	Criminal Law: Penal Code, 1860: Sections 201, 302 and 34. Murder-Circumstantial evidence-Murder of victim in her matrimonial home- Trial Court convicted brother-in-law of victim under Ss.302 and 201 IPC and his cousin under S.201 IPC-Father-in-l	Held: there was no reason to distrub concurrent findings of the courts below that identity of victim was established and that victim died in her matrimonial home-However, Courts below erred in acquitting father-in-law of victim- Role played by fat	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
205	HINDUSTAN PAPER CORPN. Vs. PURNENDU CHAKROBARTY & ORS.	Coram: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, K. VENKATASWAMI	30/10/1996	Service Law : Hindustan Paper Corporation Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules: Rule 23 (vi) (E). Loss of Lien in the event of unauthorised absence or overstayal of leave for more than specified number of consecutive days-Validity of- Held: T	Allowing the appeal, this Court Held 1. In view of the concession by the appellant-Corporation that Rule 23 (vi) (E) of the Hindustan Paper Corporation Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules must be read and given effect to subject to the complian	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
206	STATE OF TAIML NADU Vs. SIVARASAN ALIAS RAGHU ALIAS SIVARASA & OTHERS	Coram: G.N. RAY, G.T. NANAVTI	31/10/1996	Criminal Law : Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987: Section 15. Confession-Recording of-By a Police officer-Typewritten confession words "records in writing"-Meaning of-Held: wider meaning had to be given to include typew	Allowing the appeal in part, this Court HELD : 1. The expression "recorded in writing" in section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) has a wider meaning. It would include writing down by one's hand and al	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
207	BINAY KUMAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR	Coram: A.S. ANAND, K.T. THOMAS	31/10/1996	Criminal Law : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973' Section 154. FIR-Requirements of-Held: Nebulous or cryptic information from somebody who did not disclose any authentic knowledge about commission of cognisable offence would not be sufficient	Dismissing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. Under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the information must unmistakably relate to the commission of a cognizable offence and it shall be reduced to writing (if given orally) and sha	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
208	DR. MAHAK SINGH DR. RAJVIR SINGH Vs. CHANCELLOR, CH.CHARAN SINGHUNIVERSITY, MEERUT AND OTHERS	Coram: N.P. SINGH, S.B. MAJMUDAR	31/10/1996	Service Law : Appointment-Acting Principal-Of affiliated College-Inter-se seniority between senior lecturers-Determination of-For stop- gap appointment as Acting Principal-Held: General bio-data and not service bio-data assumed importance espec	Dismissing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1.1. It is not possible to accept the contention of Respondent No. 5 that his date of appointment as senior lecturer should be treated as 1-1-1986 and not 31-1-1986, because he should have made such a grie	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
209	STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. DHIRENDRA KUMAR	Coram: G.N. RAY, B.L. HANSARIA	05/11/1996	Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 302-Murder-Evidence of eye witnesses-Dying declaration recorded-Recovery of revolver-Omission in FIR of dying declaration-Effect of-Conviction by Trial Court- Acquittal by High Court- Held, FIRs are not taken as en	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1. The High Court while acquitting the accused has taken a view which is unreasonable. Therefore, the acquittal is set aside. [451 A| 2. PW-2 had stated that she had spoken to her husband PW 3 on the very	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
210	SEWA KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB	Coram: A.S. ANAND, K.T. THOMAS	07/11/1996	Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Ss. 302/34 and 201/34-Murder-Appellant-wife, alongwith her paramour, committed murder of her husband, an army personnel-She told her relatives and co-villagers that her husband had gone back to his unit- Later, when en	Held, the appellant and her co-accused were charged specifically with having shared the common intention of causing murder of the deceased, though each one of them was charged for the substantive offence u/ss. 302 and 201-In the established facts	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgemen