Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.30 seconds)
Md. Jamal @ Jamaluddin Khan & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 25 January, 2021 cites

Ashfaq vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 10 December, 2003

I am in agreement with Mr. Mondal that mere possession of deadly weapon does not satisfy the statutory requirement, as it provides "uses any deadly weapon" under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. But if the weapon with which the offender was armed was within the vision so as to be capable of creating terror in the mind of the victim, that would be sufficient to satisfy the word "uses" for the purpose of Section 397 of the I.P.C. It need not be further shown to have been actually used for cutting, stubbing and shooting as the case may be. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashfaq vs. State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) reported in (2004) 3 SCC 116 may be relied upon in this regard.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 95 - Full Document

State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Santosh Kumar on 14 July, 2006

It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of M.P vs. Santosh Kumar reported in (2006) 6 SCC 1, that in order to exercise the discretion of reducing the sentence, the statutory requirement is that the Court has to record "adequate and special reasons" in the judgment and not fanciful reasons which would permit the Court to impose a sentence less than the minimum. The reason has not only to be adequate but also special. What is adequate and special would depend upon several factors and no strait-jacket formula can be indicated. What is applicable to trial court regarding recording reasons is equally applicable to the High Court. Young age of the accused and the fact that he belongs to a Schedule Tribe were not considered to be either adequate or special for reduction of sentence in a case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Coming to the instant case the learned Counsel for the appellants have not submitted adequate and special reasons in support of their prayer for reduction of sentence suffered by the appellants.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 77 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next