Krishan VS State of Haryana - 04 Mar 09

Criminal Law--Murder--Circumstantial evidence--Hostile witness--Appeal against conviction--Case of blind murder as dead body of deceased was found lying in abandoned plot--Material witnesses not supporting case of prosecution and turned hostile--Chain of prosecution case not complete and link evidence missing--Prosecution story seems to be suspicious if statement of all witnesses alongwith circumstances are considered together--Circumstantial evidence not sufficient to hold accused guilty for alleged offence beyond reasonable doubt--Accused acquitted--|Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 and 201. (Paras 17, 18, 22, 23, 24 & 25)

India - Punjab


R VS Lichniak - 25 Nov 02

Mandatory life sentence for murder has a denunciatory value, expressing society s view of a crime which has long been regarded with peculiar abhorrence.

India - Supreme Court


Atar Khan VS State of Rajasthan - 24 Aug 01

Cr.P.C., 1973, Sec. 319 – Power of the trial Court to issue process u/Sec.319 Cr.P.C. even during the course of trial – Held – If the prosecution can produce evidence at any stage which satisfy the court that other accused or those who have not been arrayed as accused against whom proceedings have been quashed, have also committed the offence, the court can take cognizance against them and try them along with the other accused – This extra-ordinary power conferred on the Court should be used very sparingly.That once the Sessions Court is seized of the matter as a result of the committal order against some accused, the power under Section 319(1) Cr.P.C. can come into play and Court can add any person, not an accused before it, as an accused and direct him to be tried along with other accused. It has further been observed that the powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has to be sparingly used. (Para 13)

India - Rajasthan


Abdul Razak VS State of Kerala - 27 Aug 09

When the engagement of junior lawyer to defend the accused in a murder case had seriously prejudiced the accused, the same resulted in vitiating the trial the conviction of the accused is liable to be set aside.

India - Crimes


Abdul Razack @ Cheriyan @ Krk VS State of Kerala - 27 Aug 09

Indian Penal Code, 1860 -S.302 - Legal Aid to Accused Rules, 1992 - Rr.3 and 4 - Offence of Murder - Appeal against conviction - Legal Aid - Held, Lawyer, who defended the appellant, was enrolled has less than three years' practice and so, the engagement of such a lawyer was contrary to the aforementioned provision of the Cr.P.C. and the Rules of the Legal Aid to Accused Rules, 1992 - Defence arranged by the State for the appellant, who cannot afford to engage a lawyer by himself, was so poor that he did not get a fair trial - conviction and sentence imposed unsustainable in law - Trial Court shall arrange a competent lawyer to defend the appellant - Appeal allowed.

India - Kerala


State of Haryana VS Yoginder @ Parmod Son of Ramji Dass - 19 Jan 06

Murder reference - Confirmation of death penalty - The evidence collected during the investigation and presented before the trial Court as well as the trial proceedings before the Court must be examined very closely.

India - Punjab


Rakesh VS State of Rajashtan - 03 May 00

In absence of evidence that finger prints were given by accused voluntarily, finger print expert evidence that chance finger print tallied with specimen prints could not read against accused.

India - Crimes


Ramesha VS State by Tumkur Rural Plice - 30 Apr 15

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 - Sections 376, 506-B: [A.S. Pachhapure, J] Rape and criminal intimidation - Delay in filing complaint by victim on pretext of threat of danger to her life - Photographs produced by accused revealing that prior to incident there was love affair between them - No acceptable material on record for alleged offence - Victim being happily married, if ordered to appear before Court to contradict photographs, there was likelihood of spoiling her married life - Conviction of accused was upheld but sentence was confined to custodial period.

India - Karnataka


State of Rajasthan VS Kalu Ram - 09 Apr 14

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 363, 364, 376(2)(f), 302 and 201 The Facts that the dead body, weapon which had blood on it and clothes were found in the house of accused and also that the accused and deceased were seen together last have not been explained by the accused to disprove his guilt – Conviction is upheld – Appeal is not permitted. B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 363, 364, 376(2)(f), 302 and 201It has been held that the act of the accused comes under the category of the rarest of rare crimes which deserves death sentence – The accused is a tantrik and he committed rape and killed the victim cruel without any kind of provocation – Sentence of Death is correct and appropriate.

India - Rajasthan


STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS UDHAM - 22 Oct 19

S(1) Just Sentence – Aspect of sentencing should not be taken for granted as this part of Criminal Justice System has determinative impact on society.(2) High Court cannot reduce sentence imposed on accused without detailed analysis of facts of case, nature of injuries caused, weapons used and number of victims.

India - Supreme Court