Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (0.29 seconds)
Yogendra @ Jogendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 December, 2014 cites

Laxmi Kant Pandey vs Union Of India & Anr on 27 September, 1985

40. On the basis of the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Laxmi (supra), in our opinion, Janu alias Janki Prasad, whose face was disfigured, as mentioned by the trial court in the judgment, would be entitled to receive compensation of Rs.3,00,000 (Rupees Three Lakh) and other two persons namely - Chandrakala and Raju, who received acid injuries, but there was no permanent disability or disfiguration of face, would be entitled to get compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand) each. The aforesaid compensation as ordered by this court, shall be paid to the above mentioned persons within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment by the Collector Morena. CJM Morena shall inform the aforesaid persons about the judgment of this court and ensure compliance of these directions within the time stipulated.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 38 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Prajeet Kumar Singh vs State Of Bihar on 2 April, 2008

In Prajeet Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar, the accused was a paying guest for a continuous period of four years in lieu of a sum of Rs 500 for food and meals. He brutally executed three innocent defenceless children aged 8, 15 and 16, attempted to murder the father (informant) and mother who survived the attack with multiple injuries. There was 14 CR.RF.C.No. 01/14 CR.A.No. 883/14 no provocation or reason for committing this ghastly act at a time when the children were sleeping. There were several incised wounds (muscle-deep or bone-deep) caused to the deceased. Considering the brutality, diabolic, inhuman nature and enormity of the crime (multiple murders and attacks), this Court held that the mindset of the accused could not be said to be amenable to any reformation. Therefore, it came under the rarest of the rare category where not awarding a death sentence would have resulted in failure of justice.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 24 - P P Naolekar - Full Document

Bachan Singh Etc. Etc vs State Of Punjab Etc. Etc on 16 August, 1982

In Panchhi v. State of U.P., it has been observed that the brutality of the manner in which the murder was perpetrated may not be the sole ground for judging whether the case is one of the 'rarest of rate cases', as indicated in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab and that every murder being per se brutal, the distinguishing factors should really be the mitigating or aggravating features surrounding the murder. The intensity of bitterness, which prevailed, and the escalation of simmering thoughts into a thirst for revenge or retaliation were held to be also a relevant factor."
Supreme Court of India Cites 112 - Cited by 863 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Ram Singh vs Sonia & Ors on 15 February, 2007

In Ram Singh v. Sonia, the wife in collusion with her husband murdered not only her stepbrother and his whole family including three tiny tots of 45 days, 2½ years and 4 years, but also her own father, mother and sister so as to deprive her father from giving property to her stepbrother and his family. The murders were committed in a cruel, preplanned and diabolic manner while the victims were sleeping, without any provocation from the victim's side. It was held that the accused persons did not possess any basic humanity and completely lacked the psyche or mindset amenable to any reformation. It was a revolting and dastardly act, and hence the case fell within the category of the rarest of rare cases and thus death sentence was justified.
Supreme Court of India Cites 37 - Cited by 76 - B N Agrawal - Full Document

Dagdu & Others Etc vs State Of Maharashtra on 19 April, 1977

In Dagdu v. State of Maharashtra, this Court has observed as follows: (SCC pp. 90-91, paras 83-84) "83. Having considered the matter in all its aspects--penal, juristic and sociological--and having given our most anxious consideration to the problem, we are of the opinion that Accused 3, 9, 10 and 11 deserve the extreme penalty of law and that there is no justification for interfering with the sentence of death imposed upon them.
Supreme Court of India Cites 40 - Cited by 97 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document

Sunder Singh vs State Of Uttaranchal on 16 September, 2010

In Sunder Singh v. State of Uttaranchal, the accused had gone to the place of occurrence well prepared carrying jerrycans containing petrol, sword, pistol with two bullets, which showed his premeditation and cold-blooded mind. In the incident five persons lost their lives while the sole surviving lady survived with 70% burn injuries. The murder was committed in a cruel, grotesque and diabolical manner, and closing of the door of the house was the most foul act by which the accused actually intended to burn all the persons inside the room and precisely that happened. Hence the Court did not find any sentence less harsh than the death sentence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 35 - Cited by 40 - V S Sirpurkar - Full Document

M.A.Antony @ Antappan vs State Of Kerala on 22 April, 2009

In M.A. Antony v. State of Kerala, all six members of a family were murdered at their residence at night. The motive was money, and the absence of the accused from his own residence during the corresponding period and recovery of clothes under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872, fingerprints on the doorsteps of the house matching with those of the accused, and recovery of scalp hair of the accused from place of occurrence were damning circumstantial evidence. Having regard to the chain of circumstances and the diabolical manner of commission of crime the death sentence was upheld.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 23 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Jagdish vs State Of M.P on 18 September, 2009

In Jagdish v. State of M.P., the assailant murdered his wife and five children (aged 1 to 16 years) in his own house. The murders were particularly horrifying as the assailant was in a dominant position and a position of trust as the head of the family. The assailant betraying the trust and abusing his position murdered his wife and minor children (youngest being the only son just 1 year old). This Court held that the balance sheet of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances was heavily weighed against the assailant making it the rarest of rare cases. Consequently, the award of death sentence was just.
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 631 - H S Bedi - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next