46UDAY MOHANLAL ACHARYA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRACoram: B.N. AGRAWAL29/03/2001Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 : Section 167(2), Proviso-Detention of an accused-Maximum period- Prescription of-Challan not filed within the stipulated time-Consequence of-Held, an indefeasible right to be released on bail accrues to the accAllowing the appeal, the Court Held : (Per Pattanaik, J. for himself and Banerjee, J.) 1.1. Under the proviso to sub-Section (2) of Section 167 Cr.P.C., a Magistrate before whom an accused is produced may authorise detention of the accused otClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
47ARVIND SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHARCoram: UMESH C. BANERJEE, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN26/04/2001Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 302, 304-B and 498-A. Dowry death-Husband and other family members accused-Conviction by trial court-Appeal-Charge of husband converted by High Court from Section 304-B to 302-No substantial evidence to implicateAllowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The conviction and sentence imposed on the husband-appellant cannot be sustained. The evidence, is not sufficient enough to reach an irresistible conclusion of the involvement of the husband as the murdereClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
48RAJU Vs. STATE OF HARYANACoram: M.B. SHAH, BRIJESH KUMAR02/05/2001Indian Penal Code-Sections 302 and 376-Death Penalty-Justification of- Accused raped and thereafter committed murder of an 11 year old girl- Accused admitted that he had committed murder as the girl threatened to disclose the incident to her familDismissing the appeal against conviction and commuting death penalty to imprisonment of life, the Court. HELD : 1. The High Court after appreciating the entire evidence has rightly confirmed the conviction order passed by the Sessions Court. TheClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
49M.N. DAMANI Vs. S.K. SINHA AND OTHERSCoram: D.P. MOHAPATRA, SHIVARAJ V. PATIL02/05/2001Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 482-Quashing of Proceedings-Scope of-Complaint by A against B-Allegations of forgery, threat and use of force made by B against A in application for bail-A files complaint for defamation-Proceedings quashedAllowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. On a plain reading of the order of the Magistrate, issuing summons to the respondents, keeping in view the allegations made in the complaint and sworn statement of the Appellant, it appears that a primaClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
50PURAN, SHEKHAR AND ANR. Vs. RAMBILAS & ANR., STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.Coram: M.B. SHAH, S.N. VARIAVA03/05/2001Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 439-Bail-Necessity of giving reasons while granting- Distinction between reasons for bail and merits of the case. Section 439(2) Cancellation of bail-Grounds for-Held, can be cancelled where the ordDismissing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. Bail has been cancelled by the High Court for very valid and cogent reasons. Giving reasons is different from discussing merits or demerits. At the stage of granting bail a detailed examination of evideClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
51RE: SUO MOTO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MR. R, KARUPPAN, ADVOCATE Vs. RE: SUO MOTO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MR. R, KARUPPAN, ADVOCATECoram: K.T. THOMAS , R.P. SETHI , B.N, AGRAWAL12/05/2001Indian Penal Code, I860: Chapter XI-Sections 191 & 193, Perjury-Public justice-offences relating to giving false evidence-:Duty of court to curb, Writ-Quo warranto-Raising dispute of age of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India-Affidavit in suppDisposing of the suo motu proceedings initiated against the respondent, the Court HELD : 1. The Respondent is prima facie guilty of offence of perjury. Justice dispensation system would be wrecked if statutory restrictions are not imposed uponClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
52M. KRISHNAN Vs. VIJAY SINGH AND ANR.Coram: M.B. SHAH , R.P. SETHI11/10/2001Criminal Law : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 482-Criminal Proceedings-Quashing of-When civil disputes pending between the parties-Held justified. Respondents withdrew huge amounts from bank on the basis of forged documents showingAllowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. High Court was not justified in quashing the criminal proceedings against the respondents. The High Court appears to have been impressed by the fact that as the nature of the dispute was primarily of a ciClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
53DILAWAR BALU KURANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRACoram: SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, S.N. PHUKAN08/01/2002Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947/Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 5(2) and 5(1) (d)/Sections 161 and 477 A. Accused-Lecturer of private college-Appointed to evaluate answer scripts by University-Charged for accepting bribe for increasing marksAllowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1.1. The appellant being a lecture of a private college would not come within the definition of public servant as contained in Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. But, since he was appointed by the UniversiClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
54STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. M. DEVENDRAPPA & ANR.Coram: M.B. SHAH, B.N. AGRAWAL, ARIJIT PASAYAT16/01/2002Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 482-Inherent Powers of high Court-Quashing of proceedings- Exercise of-Held, should be exercised sparingly when the complaint does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, vexatious, oppressive or malafAllowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. The powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The power should beClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
55HARISINGH M. VASAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARATCoram: R.P. SETHI, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN27/02/2002Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 302. Murder-Eye witnesses-Two witnesses turned hostile-Testimony of complainant- witness-Corroboration of-Evidence of complainant-witness held reliable- Conviction of accused held valid-Reversal of acquittal ordeDismissing the appeal preferred by accused, the Court HELD: 1.1. The High Court was justified in interfering in this case by setting aside the judgment of the trial court. It has assigned valid reasons for believing the testimony of complainantClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
56RAJESH @ RAJU CHANDULAL GANDHI & ANR. Vs. STATE OF GUJARATCoram: R.P. SETHI, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN07/03/2002Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 120B, and 302 Murder-Testimony of eye witnesses-Cogent reliable and confidence inspiring- Concurrent findings of Court below as to guilt of accused-Conviction held justified-Held, no interference called for withDismissing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. There is no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact arrived at against the accused holding them guilty for which they have been convicted and sentenced. [317-G] 2. In the instant casClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
57STATE OF ORISSA Vs. THAKARA BESRA & ANRS.Coram: R.P. SETHI, D.M. DHARMADHIKARI16/04/2002Penal Code, 1860 : Section 376 Rape-Testimony of prosecutrix-Trusworthiness-Corroboration by medical evidence-Conviction by Trial Court-Appeal by accused persons- Re- appreciation of evidence by High Court-Acquittal-Appeal before Supreme Court-Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The testimony of the prosecutrix appears truthful and trustworthy being without any embellishments and exaggerations. She is corroborated by her immediate and subsequent conduct as also the medical evidencClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
58D@HAMRAMNESNIDNRGASRIANTHANSINH Vs. STATE OF GUJARATCoram: DORAISWAMY RAJU, BRIJESH KUMAR17/04/2002Penal Code, 1860 : Section 302: Murder-Husband suspecting fidelity of wife-Committing murder of his two sons-Testimony of wife-Vivid description of occurrence given by her- Prosecution case established by cogent evidence on record-Held, relianceDismissing the appeal and modifying the sentence the Court HELD : 1. The presence of PW-3 cannot be doubted in respect of which an effort was made to raise an argument in vain. The prosecution story as per her statement rings true and stands estClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
59Pawan Kumar Vs. State of HaryanaCoram: &23/07/2003Indian Penal Code, 1860: S. 302 r/w s. 34-Conviction based on circumstantial evidence- Propriety of- A taxi driver found dead in a hotel room-Two persons who had hired the taxi and were alleged to have stayed in the hotel room along with the driHeld, though it was proved that the accused hired the taxi, but it does not show complicity of the accused with the crime-There is no evidence to establish the circumstance that the two accused along with the driver stayed in the Hotel room duringClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
60Hira Lal and Ors. Vs. State (Govt. of NCT) DelhiCoram: DORAISWAMY RAJU , ARIJIT PASAYAT.25/07/2003Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sections 304-B, 306 and 498-A: Dowry death-Wife subjected to torture for dowry by the husband and his parents-Committed suicide within 7 years of her marriage-Trial Court convicted the husband and In-laws under SectionsDisposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B IPC shows that there must be material to show that soon before the death the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. Prosecution has to ruleClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgemen

Comments