Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.21 seconds)Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Deonandan Mishra vs The State Of Bihar on 28 September, 1955
In the decision reported in Deonandan Mishra v. The State of Bihar, , the Supreme Court observed as follows:-
Anant Chintaman Lagu vs The State Of Bombay on 14 December, 1959
When we apply the above principles, as laid down by the Supreme Court, to the facts of this case, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the deceased died on account of the administration of poison in the form of Diazepam and the said poison was administered by the first accused. The fact that the post-mortem doctor could not give the cause of death, does not deter us from coming to such a conclusion, in the background of the law laid down by the Supreme Court, which we have extracted above. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the first accused would not have had the knowledge that giving of such a quantity of tablets would cause death. This argument is to be stated only to be rejected, when we take into consideration that M.O.1 series are four strips with each strip containing 10 tablets. We, on the medical evidence, therefore, conclude that the learned Sessions Judge was justified in convicting the accused under Section 302, I.P.C. and there is no reason for us to interfere with the finding. In the result, the appeal deserves to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. The learned Sessions Judge shall take steps to commit the accused to jail to undergo the remaining period of sentence.
Section 109 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 8 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
1