Category: I P C

Weapon used in the crime is a stick which was lying in the house, and which, by no means, can be called a deadly weapon – Possibility of accused causing the death of the deceased while being deprived of the power of self-control, due to the provocation on account of the deceased not agreeing to pay Rs.500/- to daughter, cannot be ruled out – Sentence already undergone would serve the ends of justice – Appeal allowed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NIRMALA DEVI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Penal Code, 1860 – Ss 302 & 304-I – Army Act, 1950 – Section 69 – Murder – Conviction and Sentence – Alteration of – Appellant-accused contended that case will be governed by exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC as the incident was an outcome of a sudden fight and he acted in a heat of passion – Conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC is altered to the one under Part 1 of Section 304 of IPC

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NO.15138812Y L/NK GURSEWAK SINGH — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ.…

Accused could only be attributed with the knowledge that it was likely to cause an injury which was likely to cause the death – Case on hand does not fall within clause thirdly of Section 300 of the IPC – Conviction of the accused under Section 304 Part I of the IPC is altered to one under Section 304 Part II of the IPC – Appeal partly allowed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANBAZHAGAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…

(IPC) – Sections 308 and 338 – The appellant, as a conductor, had a duty to take care of the passengers on the overcrowded bus – However, he failed to verify if all passengers had safely boarded the bus before signaling the driver to start – Despite knowing that many students were waiting at the bus stop, he neglected his duty and acted recklessly – As a result, PW-1 suffered a fractured pelvis, putting human life in danger

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ABDUL ANSAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Determination of sentence – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – the imposition of the “sentence undergone” criteria, amounted to an aberration, and the sentencing is for that reason, flawed – HELD the appropriate sentence would be five years rigorous imprisonment.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UGGARSAIN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta, JJ. ) Criminal…

(IPC) – Sections 376, 452 and 506 – Rape – where there is a gap or infirmity in the prosecution case which could have been supplied or made good by examining a witness who though available is not examined, the prosecution case can be termed as suffering from a deficiency and withholding of such a material witness would oblige the court to draw an adverse inference against the prosecution

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DAVINDER SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and M. M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

In the absence of any credible eye witness to the incident and the fact that the presence of the accused appellants at the place of incident is not well established – Constrained to accord benefit of doubt to both the accused appellants – Conviction and sentence is set aside – Appeal allowed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHD. MUSLIM — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (NOW UTTARAKHAND) — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal…

False promise of marriage – Horoscope Examination of Rape Victim – Prosecutrix is mangali, therefore, marriage could not be solemnized and the same has been refused – Order passed by the Allahabad High Court which directed the Head of Department (Astrology Department), Lucknow may decide the matter whether the girl is mangali or not is stayed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA VACATION BENCH GOBIND RAI @ MONU — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Suo…

You missed