Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 234 (0.73 seconds)
Documents citing Dhananjay Chatterjee Alias Dhana vs State Of W.B. on 11 January, 1994

Narender And Others vs State Of Haryana on 14 March, 2022

16. Nonetheless, if one goes through the decisions of this Court carefully, it would appear that this Court takes into account a combination of different factors while exercising discretion in sentencing, that is proportionality, deterrence, rehabilitation etc. (See: Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State 13 of 17 ::: Downloaded on - 02-05-2022 01:33:05 ::: CRR-393-2021(O&M) -14 -
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Richhpal Singh @ Pal Singh vs State Of Haryana on 29 July, 2022

Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State of W.B. (1994) 2 SCC 220, State of Madhya 11 of 14 ::: Downloaded on - 26-12-2022 09:28:15 ::: CRR-2093-2008 (O&M) -12- Pradesh v. Ghanshyam Singh (2003) 8 SCC 13, State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja (2004) 1 SCC 475, Union of India v. Kuldeep Singh (2004) 2 SCC 590, Shailesh Jasvantbhai and another v. State of Gujarat and others (2006) 2 SCC 359, Siddarama and others v. State of Karnataka (2006) 10 SCC 673, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babulal (2008) 1 SCC 234, Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498)
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State Of Gujarat vs Sanjay Dangal Badgujar on 19 March, 2004

"21. Now considering the facts of the present case in the background of our observations made in the preceding paragraph, we take note of the fact that the appellant had been labouring under the strain suspecting character of his wife. This fact is mentioned by none else but by the complainant Ashaben herself in her report. She also admitted in her statement in Court that quite often there has been quarrel between the two on that count. Though denied, a suggestion has been made to PW-3 Ashaben in her cross-examination that the appellant had been telling her that their sons were not born of him. It is true that does not seem to be any immediate cause before the commission of offence, yet the fact remains that rightly or wrongly such a painful belief was being entertained by the appellant since long which constantly engaged his mind as admittedly there had been quarrels on that count between the two. Obviously he would have been brooding under that idea, which perhaps he could not contain any more. It is true that two innocent children lost their lives for no fault of theirs. We also notice that Dharia is a weapon, which is ordinarily to be found in the house of any farmer or agriculturist in that area as stated by PW-3. He seems to have used the weapon as lying in the house. The offence was obviously not committed for lust of power or otherwise or with a view to garb any property nor in pursuance of any organized criminal or anti-social activity. Chances of repetition of such criminal acts at his hands making the society further vulnerable are also not apparent. He had no previous criminal record."
Gujarat High Court Cites 46 - Cited by 1 - D K Trivedi - Full Document

Sewak Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 August, 2022

16. Nonetheless, if one goes through the decisions of this Court carefully, it would appear that this Court takes into account a combination of different factors while exercising discretion in sentencing, that is proportionality, deterrence, rehabilitation etc. (See: Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State of W.B. (1994) 2 SCC 220, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ghanshyam Singh (2003) 8 SCC 13, State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja (2004) 1 SCC 475, Union of India v. Kuldeep Singh (2004) 2 SCC 590, Shailesh Jasvantbhai and another v. State of Gujarat and others (2006) 2 SCC 359, Siddarama and others v. State of Karnataka (2006) 10 SCC 673, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babulal (2008) 1 SCC 234, Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498)
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

In Reference vs Ramnath Kewat @ Bhursoo Kewat on 29 July, 2022

-Dhananjoy Chatterji @ crime. 2. Concern for dignity Dhana v. State of West Bengal. 2. Conduct of the of human life is required Offence-u/s 302,376 & 380 criminal. to be kept in mind by IPC. the courts while The accused was one of the 3. Defenceless and considering the security guard deputed to guard without any confirmation of sentence the building Anand Apartment. provocation. of death. The deceased, a young girl of 18 4. Unprotected state of years of age, complained to her victim.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 102 - Cited by 4 - S Paul - Full Document

Kanti Alias Lucky vs State Of Haryana on 14 July, 2022

16. Nonetheless, if one goes through the decisions of this Court carefully, it would appear that this Court takes into account a combination of different factors while exercising discretion in sentencing, that is proportionality, deterrence, rehabilitation etc. (See: Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State of W.B. (1994) 2 SCC 220, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ghanshyam Singh (2003) 8 SCC 13, State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja (2004) 1 SCC 475, Union of India v. Kuldeep Singh (2004) 2 SCC 590, Shailesh Jasvantbhai and another v. State of Gujarat and others (2006) 2 SCC 359, Siddarama and others v. State of Karnataka (2006) 10 SCC 673, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babulal (2008) 1 SCC 234, Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498)
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Satnam Singh vs State Of Punjab on 14 March, 2022

16. Nonetheless, if one goes through the decisions of this Court carefully, it would appear that this Court takes into account a combination of different factors while exercising discretion in sentencing, that is proportionality, deterrence, rehabilitation etc. (See: Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State of W.B. (1994) 2 SCC 220, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ghanshyam Singh (2003) 8 SCC 13, State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja (2004) 1 SCC 475, Union of India v. Kuldeep Singh (2004) 2 SCC 590, Shailesh Jasvantbhai and another v. State of Gujarat and others (2006) 2 SCC 359, Siddarama and others v. State of Karnataka (2006) 10 SCC 673, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babulal (2008) 1 SCC 234, Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498)
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bashir Khan vs State Of Punjab on 25 July, 2022

16. Nonetheless, if one goes through the decisions of this Court carefully, it would appear that this Court takes into account a combination of different factors while exercising discretion in sentencing, that is proportionality, deterrence, rehabilitation etc. (See: Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State of W.B. (1994) 2 SCC 220, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ghanshyam Singh (2003) 8 SCC 13, State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja (2004) 1 SCC 475, Union of India v. Kuldeep Singh (2004) 2 SCC 590, Shailesh Jasvantbhai and another v. State of Gujarat and others (2006) 2 SCC 359, Siddarama and others v. State of Karnataka (2006) 10 SCC 673, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babulal (2008) 1 SCC 234, Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498)
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Satish Chander Chopra vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 7 May, 2022

16. Nonetheless, if one goes through the decisions of this Court carefully, it would appear that this Court takes into account a combination of different factors while exercising discretion in sentencing, that is proportionality, deterrence, rehabilitation etc. (See: Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State 10 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 24-07-2022 07:28:35 ::: CRR-423-2004 (O&M) -11 -
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Balbir Singh Alias Biru vs State Of Punjab on 27 October, 2025

16. Nonetheless, if one goes through the decisions of this Court carefully, it would appear that this Court takes into account a combination of different factors while exercising discretion in sentencing, that is proportionality, deterrence, rehabilitation etc. (See: Ramashraya Chakravarti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 1 SCC 281, Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana v. State of W.B. (1994) 2 SCC 220, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ghanshyam Singh (2003) 8 SCC 13, State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja (2004) 1 SCC 475, Union of India v. Kuldeep Singh (2004) 2 SCC 590, Shailesh Jasvantbhai and another v. State of Gujarat and others (2006) 2 SCC 359, Siddarama and others v. State of Karnataka (2006) 10 SCC 673, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Babulal (2008) 1 SCC 234, Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498)
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next