Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“It is most unfortunate that the convicts had to undergo incarceration in prison for a period of about 14 years due to the failure of the authorities concerned to take note of the fact that they were juveniles at the time of the commission of the crime.”
“It is a well-established principle of criminal jurisprudence that conviction on a charge of murder may be based purely on circumstantial evidence, provided that such evidence is deemed credible and trustworthy. In cases involving circumstantial evidence, it is crucial to ensure that the facts leading to the conclusion of guilt are fully established and that all the established facts point irrefutably to the accused person’s guilt.”
“The nature and location of the injuries inflicted, the choice of weapon, and the circumstances of the attack unequivocally establish the liability of the convict for causing the death of the deceased.”
No separate category is carved out as an exception to the normal Rules of remission provided under Section 4321 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for a Police personnel committing heinous crime of murdering his pregnant wife.
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment, on commutation of sentence, dating back to the year 1954.
“In dealing with circumstantial evidence, there is always a danger that conjecture or suspicion lingering on mind might take the place of proof and therefore, the Court has to be watchful and ensure that such thing should not take place.”
“The prime object of FIR, from the point of view of the informant is to set the criminal law in motion and from the point of the investigating authorities is to obtain information about the alleged activity to enable them to take suitable steps to trace and book the guilty. FIR is an important document, though not a substantial piece of evidence, and may be put in evidence to support or contradict the evidence of its maker viz., the informant.”
“Addition of Section 302 IPC in addition to pre-existing sections about dowry death and dowry related inhuman treatment is being carried out by Trial Judges as a matter of routine and in a most mechanical fashion, making the entire episode more grim and serious, without having any supporting documents or allegations”
“On noticing the presence of the ex-husband (deceased) in his house, the husband caused the death of the deceased in order to safeguard his right over person (wife) without any premeditation or intention. The case fell within the ambit of Exception 2 to Section 300 of the IPC on the ground of it being unintentional and consequently, it is culpable homicide not amounting to murder.”
“The series of inhuman acts involved extreme brutality and exceptional depravity and the crime was committed in an extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting and dastardly manner.”
The Calcutta High Court criticised the trial court for not properly assessing the evidence and for erroneously applying legal principles and set aside conviction on prosecution’s failure to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath*, JJ., reversed the impugned judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High
“The statutory provision goes to emphasise that the court is not a hapless bystander in the derailment of justice. Quite to the contrary, the court has a vital role to discharge in ensuring that the cause of discovering truth as an aid in the realization of justice is manifest.”
Bombay High Court: While addressing a matter with regard to a husband setting ablaze his wife, the Division Bench of Sadhana S.
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Sadhana S. Jadhav and Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ., modified the conviction of a husband who
Rajasthan High Court: A Division Bench of Sandeep Mehta and Sameer Jain, JJ. allowed the appeal and quashed and set aside the
Bombay High Court: Sandeep K. Shinde, J., explained as to when a charge in the alternative can be framed against an accused
Delhi High Court: While upholding the decision of Trial Court, Division Bench of Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh, JJ., reiterated that dying
Bombay High Court: Convicting a person under Section 304 Part I of Penal Code, 1860 Division Bench of Sadhana S. Jadhav and
Allahabad High Court: Sanjay Kumar Singh, J. while addressing a bail application of an accused expressed that, “A criminal conspiracy is generally