76MOHMED SAKEEM Vs. STATE OF GUJARATCoram: ANAND, A.S. (J)19/07/1994Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987-Section 3(1)-Ambit and Scope of-No evidence that injury caused to complainant with intention contemplated by Section 3(1)-Conviction u/s 3(1) not sus-tainable. Indian Penal Code, I860-SectDisposing of the matter, this Court HELD : 1.1. The complainant sustained an injury on his abdomen apart from an injury on his back. The injuries had been caused by him by a sharp knife and the designated court was right in coming to the conclusioClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
77LAXMI DEVI Vs. SATYA NARAVAN AND ORS.Coram: P.B. SAWANT , S. MOHAN09/08/1994Indian Penal Code 1860-Section 494-Bigamy-'Saptapadi' Essential ceremony of Hindu marriage-Absence of proof-factum of second marriage cannot be held to have been made out. Constitution of India-Art. 142-Indian Penal Code, I860-Section 494-Bigamy-FDisposing of the matter, this Court HELD: 1.1. In the absence of proof of such a ceremony of Saptapadi'. the factum of second marriage cannot be held to have been made out. [493-G] Kanwal Ram v. H.P. Administration, AIR (1966) SC 614 and PriyaClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
78AMRUTLAL SOMESWAR JOSHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (II)Coram: REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J)10/08/1994Indian Penal Code, I860-Section 302-Indian Evidence Act, 1872- Section 3-Circumstantial evidence: Where circumstances established by independent evidence are sufficient to bring home the guilt to the accused beyond all reasonable doubt, the convicDismissing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. Having gone through the evidence of these two witnesses, this Court agrees with the courts below that the accused was in the flat on that fateful day till 3 P.M. The evidence of P.W.2 establishes that heClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
79TARSEEM KUMAR Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATIONCoram: G.N. RAY , N.P. SINGH18/08/1994Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 3. Murder-Circumstantial Evidence-Circumstances relied on : Disclosure of accused to police-Recovery of dead body and incriminating articles from the house in possession of accused-Signs of dragging the body- ExtAllowing the appeal, giving benefit of doubt to the appellant, this Court HELD : 1. As the case is based solely on the circumstantial evidence, the Court has to be satisfied that (i) The circumstances from which con-clusion of guilt is to be drawnClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
80NARAYANAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKACoram: PUNCHHI, M.M.31/08/1994Indian Penal Code I860-Sections 376, 114-Rape of minor girl- Evidence of prosecutrix corraborating in all material particulars with medical examination and evidence of other witnesses-Accused convicted by trial court-High Conn acquitting-Held, offencAllowing the appeals, this Court HELD : 1. The prosecutrix was a reliable witness. She stood corroborated on all material particulars not only by medical evidence but also by the evidence of P.W. 2 who had appeared on the scene of the crime and seClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
81VIJAY Vs. STATE OF M.P.Coram: RAY, G.N. (J)02/09/1994Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 300-Exception 5-Sections 302 and Accused-Frustrated on account of Heavy indebtedness-Killing wife and attempting suicide-Letter written by accused unfolding decision to murder and then commit suicide-Defence-ConsDismissing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1. There is no reason to interfere with the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellant In the facts and circumstances of the case the trial court and the High Court have correctly apprecClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
82V. SUJATHA ETC. ETC. Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.Coram: MADAN MOHAN PUNCHHI , K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY19/09/1994Indian Penal Code, I860 : Sections 279 and 337-Accident-Bus Driver on "trial run"-Driver charged for rash and negligent driving-Defence of brake failure-Witnesses from Transport Corporation supporting the defence-Trial Court convicting and sentencAllowing the appeals, this Court HELD : Criminal Appeal No. 621 of 1994: 1.1. The Single Judge commented that when it is said by FW 7 the pedestrian injured in the accident that he did not know anything except that the incident was not due to aClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
83JOSEPH KURIAN Vs. STATE OF KERALACoram: PUNCHHI, M.M.04/10/1994Indian Penal Code, 1860, S. 272-Adulteration of drink for sale-Ap-pellant in control of depot which sold adulterated arrack causing death-Held, the offence stood committed on the very day appellant found in possession of adulterated arrack. KeralaAllowing the appeal of the second Appellant and partly the appeal of the first appellant, this Court HELD : 1. The offence under S.272 IPC stood committed by the first appellant on the very day he was found in possession of adulterated arrack. TheClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
84HEM CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANACoram: P.B. SAWANT , G.N. RAY , K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY06/10/1994Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Sections 304-B and 498-A. Dowry Death-Cruelty-Wife' s unnatural death by strangulation within seven years of marriage-Conviction-Sentence-Held extreme sentence of life imprisonment should be awarded in rare cases-Life impDismissing the appeal but reducing the sentence only in respect of conviction under Section 304-B, this Court HELD : 1. The plea set up by the accused that he found the dead body hanging, thereby suggesting that it could be a case of suicide com-mClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
85RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANACoram: DR. A.S. ANAND , FAIZAN UDDIN07/10/1994Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 : Sections 378 and 379. Appeal against acquittal-Power of High Court to reassess evidence--Rule of prudence requires that High Court should give proper weight to Trial Court's view-But High Court can examine whetDismissing the appeal, this Court HELD: l. The powers of the High Court in an appeal from order of acquittal to reassess the evidence and reach its own conclusions under sections 378 and 379 Cr.P.C. are as extensive as in any appeal against the oClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
86DELHI DOMESTIC WORKING WOMEN'S FORUM Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSCoram: MOHAN, S. (J)19/10/1994Constitution of India-Article 32-National Commission for Women Act, 1990-Section 10-Crimes against Women-Sexual assault of domestic servants-Need for provision of rehabilitatory and compensatory justice for women-National Commission for Women to drafDisposing of the matter, this Court HELD : 1.1, It is rather unfortunate that in recent times, there has been an increase of violence against women causing serious concern. Rape does indeed pose a series of problems of the criminal justice system.Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
87MAHABIR BISWAS AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF W.B.Coram: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J)28/10/1994Evidence Act, 1872-Section 30 Confession-Evidentiary value-Its use against a co-accused Indian Penal Code, I860 Section 302/34 Murderous assault-Retracted judicial confessions-Discoveries made pursuant to statements of two accused Conviction WhDisposing of the appeal, this Court HELD 1.1 A confession, before it can be acted upon must be established to have been voluntarily made and is true. As regards the evidentiary value of a confession, which passes the above two tests, against theClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
88STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. ARUNA DEVI AND OTHERSCoram: HANSARIA B.L. (J)08/11/1994Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Sections 173 (8) and 203-Dismissal of complaint u/s 203-Second complaint on same facts on basis of farther investigation-Order of Cognizance-Whether legally sustainable-Held, yes. A complaint was filed against the resAllowing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1.1 Dismissal of a complaint under section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is no bar to the entertainment of a second complaint on the same facts when fresh evidence conies forward on further investiClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
89SUSHIL AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF U.P.Coram: G.N. RAY , FAIZAN UDDIN08/11/1994Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 157-Delay in despatching. FIR-No Prejudice caused to accused person-Whether every delay in sending FIR fatal to prosecution-Held, No EVIDENCE-Murder Case-Motive-Relation witnesses-Evidence of-Admissibility-Disposing of the matter, this Court HELD: 1.1 It is no doubt true that Section 157 Cr.P.C. requires the sending of report forthwith to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence, but every delay in sending the FIR is not fatal toClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
90SUBA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJABCoram: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J)09/11/1994Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act, 1984-Indian Penal Code, I860-S.I4 /Section 302-Conviction u/s 302-Appeal-Death by firing with a pistol-Eye witnesses-No scope for mistaken identity- Parties known to each other from before-FIR promptly lDismissing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. Through the site plan prepared by the Investigating Officer and exhibited during the trial, the prosecution established that there was an electric post there. This apart, considering the sequence of evClick here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement

Comments