“The sword of justice given to a Judge has to be exercise with utmost responsibility and judiciously considering the reforms.”
The General Security Force Court had convicted the BSF jawan for murder and had sentenced him to life imprisonment along with dismissal from service.
Allahabad High Court said that there is a serious discrepancy in the eyewitness testimony. It does not match with other evidence, material and circumstances.
The Supreme Court held that the Court cannot be limited only to two punishments, one a sentence of imprisonment, for all intents and purposes, of not more than 14 years and the other death.
“Thrusting upon a woman the guilt of having killed a child without any proper evidence, simply because she was living alone in the village, thereby connecting with one another two unrelated aspects; reinforces the cultural stereotypes and gendered identities which the Court has explicitly warned against.”
“When the testimonies of the eye-witnesses suffer from fatal flaws, to sustain conviction on the basis of such unreliable evidence would surely amount to miscarriage of justice”
“The Trial Court has rightly convicted the accused and we do not find any illegality in the impugned judgment of conviction and therefore, the same deserves to be upheld.”
“A prominent market in the heart of the capital city is attacked and we may point out that it has not been dealt with the required degree of promptitude and attention. To our great dismay, we are forced to observe that this may be due to the involvement of influential persons.”
The accused had failed to demonstrate any illegality in the impugned judgment convicting them for the offences of kidnapping, abduction, and gang rape.
The accused father in the instant matter had allegedly committed rape on victim daughter in 2011 and 2013.
Rajasthan High Court: A Division Bench of Sandeep Mehta and Abhay Chaturvedi, JJ. contemplated an appeal where the appellant had been convicted
Karnataka High Court: A Division Bench of K.N. Phaneendra and H.B. Prabhakara Sastry, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed by an Advocate who
Supreme Court: “The mercy petition is the last hope of a person on death row. Every dawn will give rise to a
Kerala High Court: The Division Bench of A.M. Shaffique and P. Somarajan, JJ. was hearing a death reference tagged along with a
“The mass killings of Sikhs in Delhi and elsewhere in November 1984 were in fact ‘crimes against humanity’. They will continue to
Madhya Pradesh High Court: This appeal was filed before a 2-Judge Bench comprising of Sujoy Paul and Nandita Dubey, JJ., against the
“Society’s perspective is generally formed by the emotionally charged narratives, which need not necessarily be legally correct, properly informed or procedurally proper.”
Patna High Court: A Division Bench of Arvind Srivastava and Rakesh Kumar, JJ., upheld the judgment of the trial court and dismissed
Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan JJ., addressed an appeal of a convict punished under Sections 302,
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Vipin Sanghi and P.S. Teji, JJ. dismissed a criminal appeal filed under Section 374