Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 21 (0.29 seconds)
State vs 1 Wasim on 18 February, 2017 cites

State Of W.B vs Orilal Jaiswal on 23 September, 1993

6.6 Reference be made to the autopsy report. Postmortem was conducted by PW1 Dr. Manoj Dhingra and he has proved postmortem report as Ex. PW1/A. As FIR No. 1376/2015 PS Aman Vihar (State Vs. Wasim) Page 7 of 23 per such report, cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. He was also, later on, shown ligature material i.e. white-sheet and he opined that injury mentioned in MLC No. 1024/15 and as suffered by Moniya was possible with such ligature material or similar cloth piece. Such subsequent opinion has also been proved as Ex. PW1/B. 6.7 Suicide is a complex phenomenon. One, who commits suicide, is not alive to disclose as to what was going on in his or her mind when he or she committed suicide. Apex Court has in, STATE OF WEST BENGAL V. ORILAL JAISWAL AIR 1994 SC 1418, observed that the courts should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end her life by committing suicide. If it transpires to the Court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 456 - G N Ray - Full Document

K. Prema S. Rao And Anr vs Yadla Srinivasa Rao And Ors on 25 October, 2002

9.22 Undoubtedly, there is no charge u/s 306 IPC but as per the various judicial pronouncements, in such a situation, if the offence u/s 304-B IPC is not found made out, the accused can still be held guilty u/s 306 IPC. Reference be made to K. Prema S. Rao and another Vs. Yadla Sriniwasan Rao and Others, 2003 (1) SCC 217 and one recent judgment of Apex Court cited as Satish Shetty Vs. State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 1358 of 2008, Date of Decision- 03/06/2016. Moreover, the ingredients of Section 306 IPC are more or less inbuilt within Section 304B IPC as the crucial element of cruelty is sine qua non for both the said offences. There does not seem to be any kind of prejudice to accused even if he is eventually held guilty for abetment.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 208 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next