Category: Murder

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 & S.149–Murder–Unlawful Assembly- Common ; Object-After having held that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly carrying dangerous weapons with the common object to resorting to violence (as described in the charge) it was not open to the High Court to acquit some of the members

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 547 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 677 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud Criminal…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 43, 313, 354(3) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302, 307, 436 —Conviction and sentence — Whether the death sentence awarded to the Appellant is excessive, disproportionate on the facts and circumstances of the case, i.e. whether the present case can be termed to be a ‘rarest of the rare case’ —

  AIR 2014 SC 2486 : (2014) AIRSCW 3905 : (2014) 7 JT 552 : (2014) 8 SCALE 113 : (2014) 7 AD 615 : AIR 2014 SC 2486 :…

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 147, 148, 341, 447, 302 read with 109, 149 – Murder – Deceased a coparcener had a dispute over ownership of land with appellant – Witnesses accompanying appellants made categorical statement that they had gone to scene of offence with a view to prevent appellants from causing obstructions to ploughing of land by deceased

  AIR 2006 SC 2419 : (2006) CriLJ 2931 : (2006) 5 JT 419 : (2006) 5 SCALE 331 : (2006) 10 SCC 157 : (2006) 1 SCR 947 Supp…

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302–Murder–Fixed period of sentence-High court is empowered to impose a fixed term sentence—Contention that when IPC provides for only two punishments i.e. imprisonments for life or death, the court cannot introduce a third category of punishment, rejected

2016(5) Law Herald (P&H) 3885 (SC) : 2016 LawHerald.Org 1920 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra The Hon’ble Mr. Justice C. Nagappan Criminal…

You missed

Temple Bye Laws — Oachira Parabrahma Temple — Ancient structure without a building or deity, governed by Bye-laws with three-tier elected committees — Appellants, elected Secretary and President, challenged two High Court orders (2020 and 2023) that removed their committee and appointed an unelected one under an Administrative Head, citing violations of the temple’s Bye-laws and customs —Legality of appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one contrary to the temple’s Bye-laws — Petitioner argues that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction and violated the temple’s governance structure by appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one without proper legal basis — The High Court’s actions were necessary for the efficient administration of the temple until a scheme could be framed and new elections held — The Supreme Court modified the High Court orders, appointing a new retired Judge as Administrative Head to conduct fair elections within four months, while directing all parties to cooperate — The Court emphasized the need to preserve temple properties and governance as per established customs and laws — The Supreme Court struck down the High Court’s order appointing an unelected committee, appointed a new Administrative Head to conduct elections, and directed all parties to cooperate, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the temple’s established governance structure and Bye-laws.