76Md. Munna Vs. Union of India & Ors.Coram: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, B.N. SRIKRISHNA16/09/2005Constitution of India-Article 32-Writ of Habeas Corpus-Criminal Procedure Code 1973-West Bengal Correctional Service Act, 1992-Sec. 61 Expln.-West Bengal Jail Code-Rule 751 (c)-IPC-Sec. 55-Life Imprisonment-Meaning of-Length of-Power of prison authorClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
77Romesh Lal Jain Vs. Naginder Singh Rana & Ors.Coram: S.B. SINHA, R.V. RAVEENDRAN28/10/2005Penal Code, 1860-Sec. 409, 167, 218, 419, 420, 465, 468, 471-Cr.P.C.-Sec. 197-13(2)-Sanction for prosecution against a public servant-For commission of an offence-Sanction against Inspector of Police granted by Dy. Inspector General of Police-Held, sAllowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. Sanction required under Section 197 Cr. P.C. and sanction required under the 1988 Act stand on different footings. Whereas sanction under the Indian Penal Code in terms of the Code of Criminal Procedure is rClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
78Rabindra Mahto & Anr. Vs. State of JharkhandCoram: S.B. SINHA, P.P. NAOLEKAR06/01/2006Penal Code, 1860; Section 302 r/w Section 149 and Section 323: Assault and murder-Accused attacked on members of prosecution party causing death of two persons and injuring others-Trial Court found five accused persons guilty of committing offencDismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. The basis of constructive guilt under Section 149 IPC is mere membership of an unlawful assembly. If the accused is a member of an unlawful assembly, the common object of which is to commit a certain cClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
79Ramreddy Rajeshkhanna Reddy & Anr. Vs. State of Andhra PradeshCoram: S.B. SINHA, P.P. NAOLEKAR24/03/2006Criminal Trial: Circumstantial evidence-Conviction based upon-Held, the prosecution must establish all the pieces of incriminating circumstances by reliable and clinching evidence and the circumstances so proved must form such a chain of events asAllowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. The time of actual offence having regard to the different statements made by different witnesses may assume some importance as one of the grounds whereupon the High Court has based its judgment of convictClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
80State of Chhattisgarh Vs. LekhramCoram: S.B. SINHA, P.P. NAOLEKAR05/04/2006Penal Code, 1860; Ss. 366 and 376/Indian Evidence Act; S. 35: Abduction and rape of a minor married woman by the accused-Age of prosecutrix-Proof of-Entry in the School register-Admissibility in evidence-Held: A register maintained in a School isAllowing the appeal, the Court Held : 1.1. A register maintained in a school is admissible in evidence to prove date of birth of the person concerned in terms of Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act. Such dates of births are recorded in the schoClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
81T. Aruntperunjothi Vs. State Through S.H.O., PondicherryCoram: S.B. SINHA, P.P. NAOLEKAR05/04/2006Penal Code, 1860: Section 304 B-Dowry death-Held, it is necessary for the prosecution to establish that the deceased must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or relative of her husband soon before her death. Appellant anClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
82DHANESHWAR MAHAKUD and ORS. Vs. STATE OF ORISSACoram: S.B. SINHA , P.P. NAOLEKAR05/04/2006Penal Code 1860: Sections 302 r/w 149/ 302 r/w34-Charges framed against six accused for offences under Sections 302 r/w 149-High Court acquitted two accused while Conviction of remaining four accused under 302 maintained with the aid of Section 34Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
83Jitendra Ram @ Jitu Vs. State of JharkhandCoram: S.B. SINHA, P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN25/04/2006Bihar Children Act, 1982: s.32(1)-Inquiry as to age of accused to ascertain whether he is a child-Accused convicted u/ss. 302 and 201 IPC-Conviction affirmed by High Court-Plea raised before Supreme Court that at the time of commission of offenceAllowing the appeal and remitting the matter to the trial court, the Court HELD: 1.1. Before the trial court, the appellant did not raise any plea that he was a juvenile. It is true that such a plea was raised while moving an application for bailClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
84Sunny Kapoor Vs. State (UT of Chandigarh)Coram: S.B. SINHA, P.P. NAOLEKAR05/05/2006Criminal Trial. Circumstantial evidence-Death due to strangulation-Belongings of deceased missing-FIR lodged against unknown persons-Glaring discrepancies in regard to date and time of recovery of dead body-Extra-judicial confession made by accuseAllowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. The specific case of the prosecution is that the DDR No. 23 was registered at 7.20 p.m. on 19.9.1999 at the instance of PW-16. The death of the deceased evidently had occurred in the night of 18th SeptembeClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
85Lachman Singh Vs. State of HaryanaCoram: ARIJIT PASAYAT, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA28/07/2006Indian Penal Code, 1860. Section 300 Exception 4-Culpable homicide is not murder-When attracted-Held, when there is `sudden fight' implying mutual provocation and aggravation and there is absence of any premeditation-Injury is not the direct conseAllowing the appeal of R and partly allowing the appeals of D and L, the Court. HELD: 1.1. The evidence of the witnesses, more particularly, injured witnesses have been carefully analysed by the Trial Court and the High Court. There is no discrepaClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
86State of Karnataka & Anr Vs. Pastor P. RajuCoram: G.P. MATHUR, DALVEER BHANDARI04/08/2006Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Sections 173, 196(1A) and 482-Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 153B-Criminal case registered against accused under section 153B IPC-Accused was arrested and was remanded to judicial custody by Magistrate-Petition before HAllowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. The bar created under section 196(1A) IPC is against taking of cognizance of an offence by the Court. There is no bar against registration of a criminal case or investigation by the police agency or submisClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
87Director General,Directorate General of Doordarshan & Ors. Vs. Anand Patwardhan & Anr.Coram: DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA25/08/2006Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(2)-Documentary film-Given U/A certificate by Central Board of Film Certification-Tele-casting of on National Channel of Doordarshan-Refusal on the ground that its telecast would be violative oDismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. The observation of the Prasar Bharati Board that the film is not suitable due to unsatisfactory production quality and that the film has nothing specific to convey in public interest is highly irrationaClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
88Kailash Vs. State of M.P.Coram: S.B. Sinha , Dalveer Bhandari29/09/2006Penal Code, 1860 Sections 300, 302 and 304 Part II-Death caused by single blow-Plea of self-defence raised by accused-Quarrel between parties not disputed-Oral evidence inconsistent with medical evidence-Oral evidence stating that blow caused by sClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
89Kailash Vs. State of M.P.Coram: ARIJIT PASAYAT, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA09/10/2006Penal Code. I860; Section 304B-death otherwise than under normal circumstances-Held, it means death not being in the usual course but apparently under suspicious circumstances if not caused by burns or bodily injury as "normal circumstances" apparPartly allowing the appeal, as regards quantum of sentence, the Court HELD 1.1. Witnesses have spoken about dowry demand, torture and harassment and nothing substantially discrepant can be noticed. The witnesses, though cross-examined at length,Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
90Venkategowda & Ors. Vs. State of KarnatakaCoram: A. K. MATHUR, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA06/11/2006Criminal Trial FIR-Delay in lodging FIR-Effect-Held, delay in lodging FIR not fatal in every case of ocular version of eye witnessES is reliable and trustworthy-Prosecution explaining reason for delay and testimony of injured witnesses found crediPartly allowing the appeal, the Court. HELD: 1. On reprisal of the evidence of the injured witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.3 as also the evidence of eyewitness P.W.2, it is clear that the evidence on record fully establishes the case of the prosecution agClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgemen

Comments