Category: I P C

HELD “Thus, for covering an offence under Section 364A (IPC) , apart from fulfillment of first condition, the second condition, i.e., “and threatens to cause death or hurt to such person” also needs to be proved in case the case is not covered by subsequent clauses joined by “or”.”

Issues framed by the Supreme Court The Supreme Court considered the following issues : I.What are the essential ingredients of Section3 46A to be proved beyond reasonable doubt by the…

(IPC) – Sections 224, 302 and 511 – Murder of Police Constable and Attempt to Escape from Custody – Appeal against Conviction and Sentence – Accused was arrested for offences punishable under Sections 51 r/w 63, 52 A r/w 68-A and 65 of the Copyright Act, 1957 -it was for the accused to explain under what circumstances the deceased was dead – Accused has failed to offer any cogent explanation in this regard – Appeal dismissed

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SHANMUGAM — Appellant Vs. STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, S. Abdul Nazeer and Hemant Gupta,…

Only contradictions in material particulars and not minor contradictions can be a ground to discredit the testimony of the witnesses – It is clear that the assault was intentional which resulted in the death of the deceased and all accused had a common object, as such the High Court has rightly convicted the accused for offence punishable under Section 302/149, IPC etc.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJENDRA @ RAJAPPA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ.…

Facebook post read in its entirety pleads for equality of non-tribals in the State of Meghalaya – There was no intention on the part of the Appellant to promote class/community hatred – As there is no attempt made by the Appellant to incite people belonging to a community to indulge in any violence, the basic ingredients of the offence under Sections 153 A and 505 (1) (c) have not been made out – Appeal allowed

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PATRICIA MUKHIM — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ. )…

You missed