301	STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BHAGIRATH AND OTHERS	Coram: K.T.THOMAS, D.P.MOHAPATRA	12/05/1999	Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 302/34-Murder-Common Intention-Proof of-Eye witnesses reliable-Motive-Land dispute-Father of deceased holding legs of deceased when his nephew cut his throat-All three ran away together-Held, father of deceased shar	Allowing the State appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. The opinion given by a medical witness need not be the last word on the subject. Such opinion shall be tested by the court. If the opinion is bereft of logic or objectivity, court is not obliged	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
302	A.K. SINGH AND ORS. Vs. UTTARAKHAND JAN MORCHA AND ORS.	Coram: K.T.Thomas, D.P.Mahapatra, U.C.Banerjee	13/05/1999	Constitution of India, 1950-Article 226-Compensation-Quantum of-High Court issued directions to the State Government to pay compensation to the victims of Uttarakhand violence and to make fund allotments amounting to crores of rupees for developme	Allowing the appeals, this Court HELD : 1.1. High Court is not justified in fixing up huge sum as compensation for the victims of Uttarakhand violence at a premature stage without trial and without considering the evidence. It did not take into	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
303	STATE OF KERALA Vs. V. PADMANABHAN NAIR	Coram: K.T. THOMAS , M.B. SHAH	14/07/1999	Indian Penal code, 1860/ Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947/Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Sections 406, 409, 20! 109 read with 120-B/Section 5(2)/Section 197-Respondent employed in the Public Works Department- Defrauded Government by misappropri	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. An accused facing prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 cannot claim any immunity on the ground of want of sanction, if he ceased to be a public servant on the date when the Court took	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
304	COMMON CAUSE, A REGISTERED SOCIETY Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.	Coram: S.SAGHIR AHMAD, K.VENKATASWAN, S.R.BABU	03/08/1999	Administrative Law : Public Functionary-Minister-Allotment of petrol pumps out of discretionary quota-Cancellation by Supreme Court on the ground of arbitrary exercise of power-Imposition of exemplary damages of rupees fifty lakhs on the Minist	Allowing the Review Application, this Court HELD : 1. The powers of this court under Article 32 and that of the High Court under Article 226 are plenary powers and are not fettered by any legal constraints. If the court, in exercise of these pow	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
305	STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. RAJENDRAN	Coram: G.B. PATTANAIK , M. SRINIVASAN , N. SANTOSH HEGDE	22/09/1999	Penal Code, 1860-Ss.302 & 436-Murder-Accused setting his wife and children on fire-Circumstantial evidence establishing guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt-Held; accused liable to be convicted for offence under S.302-Not rarest of rare ca	Allowing the appeal, and setting aside the order of the High Court, this Court HELD : 1.1. The charge of murder has been proved beyond reasonable doubt against the accused. The order of acquittal of high Court is set aside and accused is convic	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
306	JAI KARAN Vs. STATE OF (N.C.T. DELHI)	Coram: K.T.THOMAS, D.P.MOHAPATRA	27/09/1999	Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Section 302. Murder--Accused-Causing death of wife by burning her-Conviction based on dying declaration of wife-Validity of. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 : Section 32. Dying declaration-Evidentiary value of-Accused-Al	Allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned judgment, this Court HELD : 1. The Courts below erred in passing the judgment and order of conviction against the appellant on the basis of dying declaration. In the facts and circumstances of t	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
307	LEELA RAM (D) THROUGH DULI CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.	Coram: K.T. THOMAS U.C. BANERJEE	06/10/1999	Indian Penal Code, 1860-S.302-Murder-Eye- witnesses-Apprecia-tion of evidence-Conviction and sentence by Trial Court-On appeal, High Court acquitting the accused holding that there were discrepancies in the evidence of eye-witnesses regarding numb	Allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of High Court the Court HELD : 1.1. Testimony of witnesses before the Trial Court, without any major contradiction unmistakably point to the guilt of the accused and the appreciation of evidence by	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
308	T. SUTHENTHIRARAJA,P. RAVICHANDRAN,ROBERT PAYAS & OTHERS Vs. STATE BY D.S.P., CBI, SIT, CHENNAI	Coram: D.P. WADHWA, J.	08/10/1999	Constitution of India, 1950 : Art. 137 r/w Order XL of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966, Rules 1,2- Review-,Scope of-Death sentence awarded by Designated Court-Con-firmation thereof by majority-Review-Held, per majority, no merit in the Review Pet	Dismissing the Review Petitions by majority, the Court HELD: Per Wadhwa, J.: 1.1. Having considered the scope of review and the rival contentions, it is found that there is no merit in the review petition by the four convicts sentenced to suffe	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
309	STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. CHANDRIKA	Coram: K.T. THOMAS , M.B, SHAH	29/10/1999	Criminal trial-Criminal case-Disposal on the basis of plea bargaining-Held, not permissible. Indian Penal Code, I860 : Sections 302, 304, 307 and 34-Murder- Accused- Conviction by Trial Court under section 304-Appeal-Acceptance of plea bargaini	Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1, The order passed by the High Court is on the face of it, illegal and erroneous. The concept of `plea bargaining' is not recognised and is against public policy under criminal justice system. Section 320 o	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
310	STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. LEKH RAJ AND ANR.	Coram: S. SAGHIR AHMAD , R.P. SETHI	02/11/1999	Indian Penal Code, I860. Section 376-Rape-Statement of Prosecutrix-Corroboration-Whether Mandatory- Held, there is no requirement of law to insist upon corraboration of such statement-If the prosecutrix believed to be truthful witness, no corro	Partly allowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1,1. The evidence of identifying the accused person at the trial for the first time is, from its very nature, inherently of a weak character. Test identification is considered a safe rule of prudence	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
311	RAJESH GOVIND JAGESHA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA	Coram: G.B. PATTANAIK , R.P. SETHI	02/11/1999	Indian Penal Code, I860. Criminal Tried-Sections 302 and 34-Test Identification Parade-Prolonged unexplained delay-FIR mentioning person with beard and long hairs--No. person with beard and long hairs included in the parade-Alleged accused havi	Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. In cases where a person is alleged to have committed the offence and is not previously known to the witnesses, it is obligatory on the part of the investigating agency to hold identification parade	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
312	V. VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA	Coram: G.B. PATTANAIK , M.B. SHAH	10/12/1999	Criminal Trial-Circumstantial evidence-Conviction-Circumstances established by prosecution-Such circumstances capable of explanation and not inconsistent with innocence of accused persons-field, under the facts and circumstances, conviction set as	Allowing the appeals, this Court HELD : 1. In case of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish different circumstances beyond reasonable doubt and all those circumstances taken together must lead to no other inference except that	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
313	MANOHAR LAL @ MUNNA AND ANR. Vs. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)	Coram: K.T. THOMAS , D.P. MOHAPATRA	17/12/1999	Penal Code, 1860 : Sections 302, 396 and 149-Death Sentence-Persons set ablaze in mob fury- Temporary frenzy-No systematic or organised activity-No special or personal animosity of accused persons forwards deceased individually- Held, under the	Partly allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: I. PW-1 had stated in the affidavit signed by her and marked as exhibit in the trial court that the marauders killed even S, her daughter- in-law by burning her. In fact S was not attacked by the kill	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
314	S.N. DUBE Vs. N.B. BHOIR & ORS.	Coram: G.T.NANAVATI, S.P.KURDUKAR	12/01/2000	Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act 1987, s. 15. Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Rules, Rule 15(2) and (3) and Code of Criminal Procedure 1974, s. 164 - Confessions of accused recorded by same police officer who w	Partly allowing the appeals, this Court HELD : 1.1. A-1 was guilty under s. 302 I.P.C. and A-2 to A-6 under Section 302 read with Sections 120-B and 149 I.P.C. A-1 to A-6 were also guilty under s. 3(3) TADA Act. [245-E-F] 1.2. The confession	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
315	STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SURINDER MOHAN AND OTHERS	Coram: M.B.SHAH, K.T.THOMAS	07/02/2000	Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 : Sections 154 to 176 and 200-Cross-examination-Right of-At the time of investigation or inquiry accused does not have any right to cross-ex-amine the witness. Sections 306(4) (a) and 465-Tender of pardon-Cross-e	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. At the time of investigation or inquiry for the offence triable by Sessions Court accused persons have no right to cross-examine the approver and non-examination of the approver at that stage would not	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement