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


Vijay Dutt Through his wife Dr. (Mrs. ) Veena Dutt VS R. D. Nagpal Consultant Neuro-Surgeon, Jaslok Hospital and Research Center - 07 May 14

Negligence cannot be attributed to a doctor so long as he is performing his duties to the best of his ability and with due care and caution.

India - Consumer


Yomeshbhai Pranshankar Bhatt VS State of Gujarat - 19 May 11

Point in Issue :Whether appellant committed offence of murder or under any parts of Section 304 IPC.

India - Gujarat


Praveen Kumar VS State of Karnataka - 15 Oct 03

Fact of ornaments belonging to victim being in possession of appellant immediately after murder would lead to an inference in absence of any explanation that appellant must have robbed those jewelleries from victim and in that process committed murder of victims.

India - Supreme Court


Praveen Kumar VS State of Karnataka - 15 Oct 03

Important PointFact of ornaments belonging to victim being in possession of appellant immediately after murder would lead to an inference in absence of any explanation that appellant must have robbed those jewelleries from victim and in that process committed murder of victims.

India - Crimes


Md. Yousuf VS Ramagundam Notified Area Committed - 17 Aug 86

AP MUNICIPALITIES ACT, 1965, Sec 277 - Levy of market fee on birds brought for sale in a Municipal Market-Valid Held : The intendment of the Legislature under the Act appears to be that if any animal or in ethnological sense any living being is brought into the public market for sale or sold in such market, it is liable to for levy and collection of market-fee Birds would be considered to be animals for the purposes of the Act and when they are brought into the public market for Sale or sold in such market, they are liable for levy and collection of market fee WP Dismissed

India - Andhra


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


DINESH KUMAR VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN - 24 Nov 17

Criminal procedure code 1973 - section 313 - Enquiry - Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 Offence of Murder – Witnesses – Rape – Evidence - Court vide judgment order dated ordered conviction and sentence of appellant - Hence present appeal by appellant - counsel for the appellant has submitted that prosecution had miserably failed to prove its case - There was no evidence on record establish that rape or murder of the deceased had been committed by appellant –Held, Appellant cannot be convicted merely on basis of suspicion - Fact that an obscene book was recovered from appellant during investigation would also not lead to inference that offence rape and murder had been committed by appellant - Settled proposition of law that prosecution has to prove case by leading cogent and convincing evidence and whenever doubt arises prosecution story benefit same has to extended to the accused - Rather present case there no material on record to conclude that the offence in question had bee...

India - Rajasthan


Latika Koteswara Rao VS State of A. P. - 13 Feb 08

Indian Penal Code, 1860 –Sections 302, 307, 201 – Murder of Minor Girl – Murder of Wife – –Sessions Judge, framed three charges against appellant herein, viz., that he committed the murder of his daughter aged about 3 years, by beating her with a stick, and thereafter threw her into the waters, and thereby committed offence under Section 302 I.P.C; 2) that he attempted to commit murder of his wife, and thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C – and, 3) that he caused disappearance of the evidence by throwing the dead body, into water, which is an offence punishable under Section 201 I.P.C – Through its judgment the trial Court held all the charges against the appellant, proved – It sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life, for the offence under the first charge; rigorous imprisonment of five years and fine for the offence under second charge; and rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine for the one, under the third charge – Held, Even if the entire ...

India - Andhra


Mohammed Nazim VS State of Rajasthan - 14 Mar 02

Penal Code, Sec.96 read with Sec. 304(I) and (II) – Right to private defence – Dispute – Deceased armed with stick went to the shop of the accused – Caught hold by neck – Started beating – Felt suffocation – By chance scissors came into the hands of accused – In order to get rid of his clutches struck scissors – Not repeated – Proved fatal – Convicted and sentenced for offence u/Sec.304 Part I – Held – Accused appellant had right to private defence but exceeded – Had no intention to cause death – In absence of intention offence falls u/Sec.304 Part II instead of u/Sec.304 Part I – Altered conviction. (Paras 24, 36 to 39)Right of private defence of body commences as soon as reasonable apprehension of danger to the body arises from an assault or threat to commit the offence, though the offence may not have been committed, and such right continues so long as such apprehension of danger to the body continues. Similarly it is also well settled that ...

India - Rajasthan