cites: 19295584 doctypes: judgments

Digamber Vaishnav . vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 5 March, 2019

Penal Code has to be modified. Our view is fortified by the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Digamber Vaishnav vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2019) 4 SCC 522, wherein, at paragraphs 18, 19, 40 and 41, it is held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 68 - S A Nazeer - Full Document

Kanhaiya Alias Moti Lal vs Kanhaiya Lal on 12 February, 1924

In Kanhaiya Lal v. State of Rajasthan [Kanhaiya Lal v. State of Rajasthan, (2014) 4 SCC 715 : (2014) 2 SCC (Cri) 413] , the Court has reiterated that the last seen

Allahabad High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Suresh on 20 February, 2019

27. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has declared that the principles for sentencing and proportionality/balancing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances have to be taken into consideration while imposing imprisonment for life, in the case of State of M.P. vs. Suresh reported in (2019) 14 SCC 151, at paragraphs 13 and 14 held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 34 - D Maheshwari - Full Document

Rampal Singh vs State Of U.P on 24 July, 2012

28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering provisions of Sections 299, 300, 302, 304 of the Indian Penal Code, in the case Rampal Singh vs. State of U.P., reported in (2012) 8 SCC 289, at paragraphs 11, 14, 29 and 30, held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 105 - S Kumar - Full Document

Abdul Waheed Khan @ Waheed And Ors vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 27 August, 2002

punishment would be dealt with under Section 304 of the Code. Various judgments of this Court have dealt with the cases which fall in various classes of Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly and Fourthly, respectively, stated under Section 300 of the Code. It would not be necessary for us to deal with that aspect of the case in any further detail. Of course, the principles that have been stated in various judgments like Abdul Waheed Khan v. State of A.P. [(2002) 7 SCC 175 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1301] , Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab [AIR 1958 SC 465 : 1958 Cri LJ 818] and Rajwant Singh v. State of Kerala [AIR 1966 SC 1874 : 1966 Cri LJ 1509] are the broad guidelines and not cast-iron imperatives.

Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 96 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Shri Murli Alias Denny vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 February, 1993

Indian Penal Code, in the case of Murli alias Denny vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1995 Supp (1) SCC 39, at para 5 held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 14 - N P Singh - Full Document

Ram Kumar Rai @ Kali vs State Of Chhattisgarh 15 Wpcr/264/2020 ... on 18 June, 2020

the guilt of the accused and the other is to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused, should be adopted. This principle has a special relevance in cases wherein the guilt of the accused is sought to be established by circumstantial evidence [see Kali Ram v. State of H.P. [Kali Ram v. State of H.P., (1973) 2 SCC 808 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 1048] ].

Chattisgarh High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 3 - P K Mishra - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results