Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.48 seconds)
Documents citing Md. Akhtar Alam vs State Of West Bengal & Others on 25 August, 2011

Mahesh Ram vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 July, 2022

In the matter of Debashis Daw v. State of West Bengal3, the Supreme Court, after referring to the decision in Akhtar Alam v. State of West Bengal 4 observed that the prosecution is required to establish whether the accused persons were present and whether they shared a common object. For resorting to the provisions of Section 149 of IPC, the prosecution has to establish that: (I) there was an assembly of five persons; (ii) the assembly had a common object; and (iii) the said common object was to consist one or more of the five illegal objects specified in Section 141 of IPC. The pivotal question of applicability of Section 149 of IPC has its foundation on constructive liability which is the sine qua non for its application. It contained essentially only two ingredients, namely, (i) offence committed by any member of any unlawful assembly consisting five or more members and; (ii) such offence must be committed in prosecution of the common object (Section 141 IPC) of the assembly or members of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - S Agrawal - Full Document

Manoj Kumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 July, 2022

In the matter of Debashis Daw v. State of West Bengal3, the Supreme Court, after referring to the decision in Akhtar Alam v. State of West Bengal 4 observed that the prosecution is required to establish whether the accused persons were present and whether they shared a common object. For resorting to the provisions of Section 149 of IPC, the prosecution has to establish that: (I) there was an assembly of five persons; (ii) the assembly had a common object; and (iii) the said common object was to consist one or more of the five illegal objects specified in Section 141 of IPC. The pivotal question of applicability of Section 149 of IPC has its foundation on constructive liability which is the sine qua non for its application. It contained essentially only two ingredients, namely, (i) offence committed by any member of any unlawful assembly consisting five or more members and; (ii) such offence must be committed in prosecution of the common object (Section 141 IPC) of the assembly or members of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - S Agrawal - Full Document

Kachara Bai vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 July, 2022

In the matter of Debashis Daw v. State of West Bengal3, the Supreme Court, after referring to the decision in Akhtar Alam v. State of West Bengal 4 observed that the prosecution is required to establish whether the accused persons were present and whether they shared a common object. For resorting to the provisions of Section 149 of IPC, the prosecution has to establish that: (I) there was an assembly of five persons; (ii) the assembly had a common object; and (iii) the said common object was to consist one or more of the five illegal objects specified in Section 141 of IPC. The pivotal question of applicability of Section 149 of IPC has its foundation on constructive liability which is the sine qua non for its application. It contained essentially only two ingredients, namely, (i) offence committed by any member of any unlawful assembly consisting five or more members and; (ii) such offence must be committed in prosecution of the common object (Section 141 IPC) of the assembly or members of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - S Agrawal - Full Document

Bhuwan Bai vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 July, 2022

In the matter of Debashis Daw v. State of West Bengal3, the Supreme Court, after referring to the decision in Akhtar Alam v. State of West Bengal 4 observed that the prosecution is required to establish whether the accused persons were present and whether they shared a common object. For resorting to the provisions of Section 149 of IPC, the prosecution has to establish that: (I) there was an assembly of five persons; (ii) the assembly had a common object; and (iii) the said common object was to consist one or more of the five illegal objects specified in Section 141 of IPC. The pivotal question of applicability of Section 149 of IPC has its foundation on constructive liability which is the sine qua non for its application. It contained essentially only two ingredients, namely, (i) offence committed by any member of any unlawful assembly consisting five or more members and; (ii) such offence must be committed in prosecution of the common object (Section 141 IPC) of the assembly or members of that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - S Agrawal - Full Document

Sk. Akhtar Alias Md. Akhtar vs The State Of West Bengal & Others on 26 July, 2016

AB Court No.28 W. P. 11430 (W) of 2016 Sk. Akhtar alias Md. Akhtar Vs The State of West Bengal & Others Mr. Brijesh Giri, Mr. Sudhakar Thakur ...for the Petitioner. Mr. Samrat Sen, Sr. Advocate, Mr. M. K. Biswas ...for the State. Mr. Sen, learned senior counsel appearing for the State submits a report wherefrom it is noted that the graver offences have been added to the first information report. Prayer for cancellation of bail has been made and it has been reported that one of the FIR named accused persons is in detention in connection with another case while another is absconding.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - J Bagchi - Full Document
1