| Topics |
Headnote |
Judgement |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
|
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
IPC — S 34 — Common Intention — Mode of proof — Held, the common intention is to be gathered from the manner in which the crime has been committed. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
IPC — Ss 34 — Attraction of — Both the appellants came together armed with firearms in the wee hours — Both indiscriminately fired — Held, conduct & the manner of commission of crime — is sufficient to attract Section 34 IPC — as both the accused acted in furtherance of common intention. (Para 15) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
CrPC — S 378(1)(3) — Appeal against acquittal — IPC — S 107 —Suicide by consuming acid — Abetment to— Related witness — Evidence of — no evidence other than evidence of near relatives of the deceased— to connect the accused with the crime — Independent witness — not examined —Deceased — was raising quarrel with her mother-in-law — & talked with abusive language with her — Accused-husband intervened & slapped her — Held, cannot be considered to be a factor to drive her to commit suicide as the incident occurred due to fault on the part of the deceased — Acquittal upheld —Indian Evidence Act — Section 3 — relevant fact. (Para 8) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
Constitution — Art. 21 — Right to speedy trial —IPC — Ss 279 & 338 — MV Act — S 134 — FIR under — Charge sheet missing — Period of Limitation elapsed — Held, this is a case of gross and undue delay which will certainly cause prejudice to the Applicant — the delay in the proceedings is unreasonable and is certainly fatal — will infringe the fundamental right of speedy trial u/Art. 21. (Para 12) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
Criminal Jurisprudence — IPC — S 300 clause(3) — Attraction of — Deceased was discharged from the hospital in good condition & survived for sixty two days — Held, in such facts and circumstances prosecution should elicit from the examining doctor — that the injury sustained by the deceased was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death — in absence of the same — the court cannot draw an inference that the intended injury caused was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death — so as to attract clause (3) of Section 300. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
IPC — Ss 302 & 201 —Conviction under —Circumstantial Evidence —Case based on —Delay in FIR —not explained — Independent witnesses —not supporting the case by —Human bones recovered —DNA analysis not conducted — Cause of death could not be ascertained— Held, prosecution has failed to prove that the death of the deceased was either homicidal or otherwise —Last seen theory — not established — Conviction set aside — Acquittal. (Para 8, 9 & 10) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
IPC — Ss 302, 304 Part I , 307 r/w 34 & 452 — Conviction under — Gunshot injury in the head — After the attack the deceased survived for sixty two days after his surgery — discharged in stable condition — Cause of death — Septicaemia — Held, was indirectly due to the wounds sustained during assault — the bullet injury was on the head, vital organ— Conviction modified — Sec. 304 Part I & Sec. 304 Part I r/w 34 —Sentence altered. (Para 9 & 15) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
IPC — S306 & 498-A — Conviction under — Death by burn injuries — Presence of accused at the place of incident admitted — Dying declaration — No allegation against present appellant — did not claim that she was ever beaten by the accused — Prosecution witnesses — material contradictions, aggegerations & omissions by —Burn injuries sustained by accused — benefit of doubt —Acquittal. (Para 21) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
CrPC — S 378 — Appeal against Acquittal — IPC — S 323,325,504 & 506(2) — Injury — Nature of — Cross-examination — accepted by doctor — injuries suffered by the complainant could be by way of vehicular accident — Medical certificate — nowhere stated that with what weapon the accused had inflicted the injuries on the body of the complainant — Acquittal upheld. (Para 6) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
CrPC — S 377 — Appeal for enhancement of the sentence — IPC — S 324 — Bombay Police Act — Section 135 (1) — Conviction under — Nature of Injury — on the right thumb and right index finger — Observing manner, weapon used & injury — enhancement of sentence not considered — Appeal dismissed — Evidence Act — S 3 —relevant fact. (Para 12) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
CrPC — S 482 — Quashing of proceedings — IPC — Ss 409, 468 & 471 — Information Technology Act— Ss 65 and 66 r/w Section 120(b), IPC — Forgery, Misappropriation of funds & Breach of trust — Creation of website as a separate division as Consultancy Services — Allegation of — Held, It is made clear in the website itself that Consultancy Services is the part of main company —a link shows that Consultancy Services is a sister concern — The address of Consultancy Services is shown to be the same address as that of main company — No attempt whatsoever to project the Consultancy Services as a concern or a Company which is independent & separate — Held, not possible to view the act as an act of forgery —Not a single rupee was received by the appellant in his own name or even separately — Nor has he entered into any contract in his own name— Held, not possible to attribute any intention of cheating — proceedings seem to be due to a private and personal grudge —Quashed. (Para 9, 10, 12, 14 & 15) |
PDF |
| INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 |
CrPC — S 378 — Appeal against Acquittal — IPC — Ss 504 & 506(2) —Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989—Section 3(1)(10) —No specific statement of complainant about the abuse — No corroboration— Witnesses had come to the scene of offence subsequently — Place of incident — occurred at the house of the Complainant and not at the public place — Held, Necessary ingredients for offence u/s 504 & 506(2), IPC are also not established —Acquittal upheld —Evidence Act — S 3 —relevant fact. (Para 11) |
PDF |
|