Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.31 seconds)
Mohammad Sadiq vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2014 cites

Ajmer Singh vs State Of Haryana on 15 February, 2010

So, far as authority in Ajmer Singh's case (Supra) is concerned, that authority also does not help the case of the accused, rather helps the case of the prosecution. The ratio of the said judgment is that principle of parity in criminal cases apply where the case of the accused is similar in all aspects as that of co-accused. It was further observed in the said ruling that the other co-accused convicted under separate trial cannot claim parity. There must be single trial to claim the parity. The accused in Sessions case No. 68 was given lessor sentence as his daughter was suffering from certain disease and nobody was there in the family to look after her. So, the appellant cannot claim parity with the said accused as it is not the case of the appellant that his daughter is also suffering from any disease and moreover, he has admitted his fault. So, the principle of pre-bargain was available to that accused. The principle of pre- bargain was also available to Bodh Raj, accused, as he has also admitted his guilt at the very beginning. So, in view of the above discussion, no ground for interference in the quantum of sentence is also made out.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 657 - H L Dattu - Full Document
1