Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.48 seconds)Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
State Of Rajasthan vs Raja Ram on 13 August, 2003
In Kulvinder Singh and another v. State of Haryana
Crl.A.718/2010
16
[2011 (5) SCC 258], the Apex Court quoted the ratio in Raja
Ram's case (supra) with approval.
Baljeet Kaur @ Kulvinder Kaur vs State Of Haryana on 26 September, 1997
In Kulvinder Singh and another v. State of Haryana
Crl.A.718/2010
16
[2011 (5) SCC 258], the Apex Court quoted the ratio in Raja
Ram's case (supra) with approval.
Sansar Chand vs State Of Rajasthan on 20 October, 2010
In the decision in Sansar Chand v. State of Rajasthan
[2010(10) SCC 604], the Apex Court observed that there is no
absolute rule that an extra-judicial confession can never be the
basis of a conviction, although ordinarily an extra-judicial
confession should be corroborated by some other material.
Jackaran Singh vs State Of Punjab on 20 April, 1995
The decision in Jackaran
Singh's Case (supra) along with the order of the Apex Court suo
motu reviewing its order dated 20-4-1995 had been published in
the said journal.
Natarajan vs Union Territory Of Pondicherry on 3 February, 2003
Referring to the corrigendum whereby the Apex
Court reviewed its order on 25-4-1996, the Division Bench of the
Madras High Court in Natarajan v. Union Territory of
Pondicherry (2003 Crl.L.J. 2372 expressed its anguish regarding
the non-publication of the corrigendum in the journals having
circulation through out India. The Madras High Court also
noticed that the only journal wherein the aforesaid Judgment of the
Crl.A.718/2010
24
Supreme Court along with the corrigendum was published was the
Kerala Judicial Vision (1998 JV (1) Page 1 to 5).
State Of Rajasthan vs Teja Ram And Others on 1 February, 2000
25. The Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Teja Ram
[1999 Crl.L.J. 2588 (SC)] = AIR 1999 SC 1776 observed thus: