Showing : 1701-1710 of 4014 Results

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, Section 7A, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 364A, 201, 120B, 34-- Murder - Plea of juvenility - As per Middle Standard and Matriculation certificates issued by PSEB, accused was aged 17 years 6 months and 12 days at the time of commission of offence - Accused was sentenced to life imprisonment and he is in jail for last 13 years - Held, plea of juvenility can be..........
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 328-- Poisoning - Ingredients required to be proved are : (i) that poison or the stupefying substance, which is allegedly administered by any means to the victim, was in possession of accused; (ii) that accused had himself administered the drug or substance or had caused the same to be taken by the..........
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 328, 307, 302-- Poisoning - If no hurt or grievous hurt is found to have been caused due to act of administering or making the victim to swallow the poison etc. is caused no offence u/s 328 IPC and for that reason under any provision like that u/ss 307 and 302 IPC is made out...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302-- Seven persons abducted by police - They were found in different police stations and also in residential quarters near the police station - On this evidence, Court cannot hold that the two appellants killed the seven abducted persons only because seven persons have not been traced or are found..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, Section 3-- Explosions and firing - Gruesome carnage resulting in death of 35 persons - Name of appellant No.2 not given in FIR - Injured witness deposing that appellant No.2 was slitting throats of deceased - However, said witness was unable to identify appellant - No other witness attributing role to..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, Section 3-- Explosions and firing - Gruesome carnage resulting in death of 35 persons - Appellants No.3 and 1 named in FIR - Injured witness deposed that both appellants were slitting throats of deceased - Both appellants were identified by eye witnesses in Court as participant in crime - Conviction of both..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302-- Murder - Rarest of rare case - Death sentence - Validity - Gruesome carnage resulting in death of 35 persons - Incident took place 20 years back - Caste war between haves and have nots - Accused belonged to latter category and possibly participated in crime due to poverty and caste conflict - No..........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 304A-- Nature of offence - Accused inflicted Ballam blow near right armpit of deceased - Deceased died after seventeenth day of incident on account of septicemic shock due to ante mortem injuries to chest & abdominal visceras with secondary infections - Injury was not primary cause of death - Motive not..........
TRIPURA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 3-- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Accused alleged to have caused death of brother of informant by lathi blows - So, i, law of informant had not disclosed to anybody else except before trial Court that he had seen deceased with accused for last time before discovery of dead body - It could not be..........
TRIPURA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 3-- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Last seen theory - Held, in case of circumstantial evidence, when theory of last seen together is one of the circumstances to link accused with offence and prove his guilt but said fact, if disclosed for first time in Court, should not be accepted as always last..........

Showing : 1701-1710 of 4014 Results