Search Results Page

Search Results

51 - 60 of 1129 (1.34 seconds)
Documents citing Bachan Singh Etc. Etc vs State Of Punjab Etc. Etc on 16 August, 1982

The State Of Bihar vs Md. Tahir on 7 January, 2026

"41. Thereafter, the High Court dealt with the precedents laid down by this Court in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab11, Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab12 to examine whether the litmus test, namely, that the alternative option being unquestionably foreclosed was fulfilled or not. Thereafter, the High Court noticed the judgment of this Court in Swamy Shraddananda10 and the holding thereon that to avoid a sentence of death, it is possible for the courts to devise a graver form of sentence of imprisonment for life beyond fourteen
Patna High Court Cites 47 - Cited by 0 - R R Prasad - Full Document

The State Of Punjab vs Kulwinder Singh on 5 July, 2005

"31. considering the view expressed by this Court in Bachan Singh case (1980 Cri LJ 636) and Machhi Singh case (1983 Cri LJ 1457) we have no hesitation in holding that the case at hand falls in the rarest of rare category and death sentence awarded by the trial Court was appropriate. The acquittal of the respondent -accused is clearly unsustainable and is set aside. In the ultimate result, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and that of trial Court is restored. The appeals are allowed."
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 11 - S Kant - Full Document

The State Of West Bengal vs Baladeb Paul on 12 March, 2026

15. From the impugned judgment it appears that the learned Trial Judge at the time of sentencing the convict considered the following judgments:- (1) Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 684, Machhi Singh V. State of Punjab reported in (1983) 3 SCC 470, (3) Ravji@ Ram Chandra V. State of Rajasthan reported in (1996) 2 SCC 175, (4) Swamy Shradhananda V. State of Karnataka reported in (2008) 13 SCC 767, (5) Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar V. State of Maharashtra reported in (2009) Page 13 of 38 2026:CHC-AS:399-DB 6 SCC 498, (6) Sangeet and another V. State of Haryana reported in (2013) 2 SCC 452 and (7) Shankar Kisanrao Khade V. State of Maharashtra reported in (2013) 5 SCC 546.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - A Banerjee - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Vishwajeet Kerba Masalkar on 23 July, 2019

10 1980 (2) SCC 684 11 1983 (3) SCC 470 12 1973(1) SCC 20 13 2015(6) SCC 632 49 of 66 ::: Uploaded on - 23/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 24/07/2019 03:17:10 ::: 50 conf-2.16.docx "24. We would not lumber the discussion by tracing the entire death penalty jurisprudence as it has evolved in India, but only limit the exercise to cull out the determinants which would weigh large in our mind to award appropriate sentence while balancing the mitigating and aggravating circumstances. We are mindful of the principles laid down by this Court in Jagmohan Singh v. State of U.P., Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab and Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab as followed by this Court upto the present. The aforesaid decisions indicate that the most significant aspect of sentencing policy in Indian criminal jurisprudence regarding award of death penalty is that life sentence is a rule and death sentence is an exception only to be awarded in "rarest of rare cases." Death sentence must be imposed only when life imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequate punishment having regard to the relevant circumstances of the crime, and provided the option to impose sentence of imprisonment for life cannot be conscientiously exercised having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and all the relevant circumstances. The circumstances which should or should not be taken into account, and the circumstances which should be taken into account along with other circumstances, as well as the circumstances which may, by themselves, be sufficient, in the exercise of the discretion regarding sentence cannot be exhaustively enumerated.
Bombay High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 1 - B P Dharmadhikari - Full Document

Registrar General High Court Of ... vs Prakash Jadav S/O Halappa Jadav Mason ... on 1 June, 2006

Para 58. From Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab and Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab, the principle culled out is that when the collective conscience of the community is so shocked, that it will expect the holders of the judicial power centre to inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards desirability or otherwise of retaining death penalty, the same can be awarded. It was observed:
Karnataka High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Budhraj Singh Son Of Shamsher Singh, Jai ... vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 26 May, 2006

68. Under the old code of criminal Procedure ample discretion was given to the courts to pass death sentence as a general proposition and the alternative sentence of life term could be awarded in exceptional circumstances, that too after advancing special reasons for making this departure from the general rule. The new Code of 1973 has entirely reversed the rule. A sentence for imprisonment for life is now the rule and capital sentence is an exception. It has also been made obligatory on the courts to record special reasons if ultimately death sentence is to be awarded. A Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab while upholding the constitutional validity of the death sentence voiced that as a legal principle death sentence is still awardable but only in rarest of rare cases when the alternative option of lesser sentence is unquestionably foreclosed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 7 - I Murtaza - Full Document

Principal Sessions Judge vs Marimuthu, Son Of Balaswamy on 26 March, 2004

While considering the death sentence under Section 302, IPC with reference to "special reasons as provided in sub-section 3 of Section 354, Cr.P.C., after referring to the decisions in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, and in Machhi Singh and after noting the factual finding that 9 year old child was sacrificed in the most brutal and diabolic manner which falls within the "rarest of rare" category, the Supreme Court upheld the death sentence awarded and dismissed the appeal.
Madras High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - P Sathasivam - Full Document
Previous   2 3 4 5 6   7 8 9 10 11 Next