Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 57 (0.82 seconds)Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Smt. Nilabati Behera Alias Lalit Behera ... vs State Of Orissa And Ors on 24 March, 1993
17.
2 : Rubabbudin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 2 SCC 200 : (2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 1006
3 :Narmada Bai V. State of Gujarat, (2011) 5 SCC 79 : (2011) 2 SCC (Cri) 526
7 :Nilabati Behera Vs. State of Orissa, (1993) 2 SCC 746 : 1993 (Cri) 527.
Shri D.K. Basu,Ashok K. Johri vs State Of West Bengal,State Of U.P on 18 December, 1996
In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. [(1997) 1 SCC
416 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 92] the expression used by this Court for determining the
compensation was "monetary compensation". The formula adopted was "cost to cost"
Rudul Sah vs State Of Bihar And Another on 1 August, 1983
In Rudul Sah case [(1983) 4 SCC
141 : 1983 SCC (Cri) 798] this Court used the terminology "palliative" for measuring
the damages and the formula of "ad hoc" was applied.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 106 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Sube Singh vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 3 February, 2006
108. Several factors may gauge on a constitutional court in determining the punitive
damages such as contumacious conduct of the wrongdoer, the nature of the statute,
gravity of the fault committed, the circumstances, etc. Punitive damages can be awarded
when the wrongdoers' conduct "shocks the conscience" or is "outrageous" or there is a
wilful and "wanton disregard" for safety requirements. Normally, there must be a direct
connection between the wrongdoer's conduct and the victim's injury."
104.7 In Sube Singh Vs. State of Haryana, (2006) 3 SCC 178, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court held that the quantum of compensation will depend on the facts and circumstances of
each case and observed as follows.