IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil appeal No. 4399 of 2005 (Arising out of SLP (C) no. 17656 of 2004 Decided On: 19.07.2005 Appellants: Sushil Kumar SharmaVs.Respondent: Union of India (UOI) and Ors. JUDGMENT: By this petition purported to have been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short ‘the Constitution’) prayer […]Read More Misuse of 498a – False 498A Legal Terrorism says Supreme Court in Sushil Kumar
Supreme Court of India Brijlala Pd. Sinha vs State Of Bihar on 13 July, 1998 Author: Pattanaik Bench: M Mukherjee, G Pattanaik PETITIONER: BRIJLALA PD. SINHA Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF BIHAR DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/07/1998 BENCH: M.K. MUKHERJEE, G.B. PATTANAIK ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: WITH CRL. APPEAL Nos. 218/98, 279/98 & 280-282/98 JUDGMENT PATTANAIK,J. These five […]Read More Supreme Court on Fake Encounter Killing
Comment : A case where a person shoots to kill his adversary but ends up killing his wife – is convicted of murder by aid of S.301 – The Court holds that his malice/intention transferred to the wife of intended victim – it is also pertinent to note that S.299/300 talks about whoever causes […]Read More Transmigration of motive/Transfer of Malice – S.299/300/301 IPC
Supreme Court of India Sanjeev Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 January, 1999 Equivalent citations: AIR 1999 SC 782, 1999 (1) ALD Cri 322, 1999 CriLJ 1138 Author: G Pattanaik Bench: G P Shah ORDER G.B. Pattanaik, J. 1. These three appeals arise out of one Sessions Trial being Sessions Trial No. […]Read More for a charge u/s 212 – knowledge of commission of offence sine qua non
In this interesting case – the Court convicted the man for murdering his wife, on the basis of following evidence – the chain of circumstantial evidence :- i) Motive (Suspected infidelity on part of wife – strained relations on that count) ii) Last Seen together. iii) Unnatural subsequent conduct. iv) killed wife at hotel – […]Read More Supreme Court convicting man for wife’s murder – circumstantial evidence.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Rao Harnarain Singh Sheoji Singh … vs The State on 12 August, 1957 Equivalent citations: AIR 1958 P H 123, 1958 CriLJ 563 Author: T Chand Bench: T Chand ORDER Tek Chand, J. 1. This is an application under Section 498, Criminal Procedure Code, for release of the petitioners on bail pending […]Read More The difference between Consent & Submission in cases of Rape
This Judgment highlights the scope of scrutiny at the stage of discharge. Supreme Court of India R.S. Mishra vs State Of Orissa & Ors. on 1 February, 2011 Bench: J.M. Panchal, H.L. Gokhale HELD:1.1. The provision concerning the framing of a charge is to be found in Section 228 of Cr.P.C. This Section is however, […]Read More Scope of Scrutiny at the stage of discharge …Supreme Court
CASE NOTE : A true classic on Transmigration of Motive/Transfer of Malice cases. In this case the accused gave poisoned halwa to X who having enough to make him sick, threw it away – which was eaten by two children who died. Accused was held liable for death of these two children by aid of :- […]Read More Transfer of Malice under Indian Penal Code.
Comment : The Court held that to bring a case under section 300 IPC Part 3 – the prosecution need not prove that the accused knew the injury to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death – this would be too onerous – and would be tantamount to requiring a direct intention […]Read More Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab – SC on Murder S.300 IPC
Comment : defence witnessess cannot always be termed to be tainted one. defences witnesses are entitled to equal treatment and equal respect as that of the prosecution. The issue of credibility and the trustworthiness ought also to be attributed to the defence witnesses at par with that of prosecution Supreme Court of India State Of […]Read More Perusal of Defence testimony