Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.18 seconds)
Amarjeet Singh vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 16 October, 2003 cites

Ranjit Thakur vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 October, 1987

8. On the contrary the Apex Court in the case of Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1987 SC 2386, has held that "the question of the choice and quantum of punishment is within the Jurisdiction and discretion of the Court-Martial. But the sentence has to suit the offence and the offender. It should not be vindictive or unduly harsh. It should not be so disproportionate to the offence as to shock the conscience and amount in itself to conclusive evidence of bias. The doctrine of proportionality, as part of the concept of judicial review, would ensure that even on an aspect which is, otherwise, within the exclusive province of the Court-Marital, if the decision of the Court even as to sentence is an outrageous defiance of logic, then the sentence would not be immune from correction. Irrationality and perversity are recognised grounds of judicial review."
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 731 - A P Sen - Full Document

Harpal Singh vs State Public Services Tribunal, Bench ... on 18 January, 2000

A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Harpal Singh v. State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow and Ors. 2000 (2) AWC 1075 : 2000 (86) FLR 334, held that where it was on account of negligence of the constable of the G.R.P. that one passenger was misbehaved with and was murdered, the same could not be a case of serious misconduct and held that the punishment of dismissal from service was totally disproportionate to the offence and thus directed reinstatement of the employee in service, with half back wages and also ordered that he be given a severe warning.
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 10 - M Katju - Full Document
1