Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.69 seconds)V.P.Rajappan vs State Of Kerala on 29 November, 2005
10. The learned counsel invited my attention to the
decision of this court as well as the Apex Court respectively
reported in Rajappan V. State of Kerala, (1981 KLT 41)
and Shamnsaheb M. Multtani V. State of Karnataka,
(2001 2 SCC 577) and on application of the principles laid
down in the above decisions, in the facts and circumstances
involved in the present case would show that the
proceedings adopted by the court below and the omission in
framing a proper charge, has adversely affected the
accused, which resulted in miscarriage of justice.
Therefore, the matter requires re-consideration by the trial
court and hence the conviction and sentence and the
judgment of the trial court are not sustainable and the same
is liable to be set aside.
Shamnsaheb M.Multtani vs State Of Karnataka on 24 January, 2001
10. The learned counsel invited my attention to the
decision of this court as well as the Apex Court respectively
reported in Rajappan V. State of Kerala, (1981 KLT 41)
and Shamnsaheb M. Multtani V. State of Karnataka,
(2001 2 SCC 577) and on application of the principles laid
down in the above decisions, in the facts and circumstances
involved in the present case would show that the
proceedings adopted by the court below and the omission in
framing a proper charge, has adversely affected the
accused, which resulted in miscarriage of justice.
Therefore, the matter requires re-consideration by the trial
court and hence the conviction and sentence and the
judgment of the trial court are not sustainable and the same
is liable to be set aside.
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
1