Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 22 (1.21 seconds)Section 304B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 227 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Of Orissa vs Debendra Nath Padhi on 29 November, 2004
“15. But when the Judge is fairly certain that there is no
prospect of the case ending in conviction the valuable time of
the Court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the
purpose of formally completing the procedure to pronounce the
conclusion on a future date. We are mindful that most of the
Sessions Courts in India are under heavy pressure of work-load.
If the Sessions Judge is almost certain that the trial would
only be an exercise in futility or a sheer waste of time it is
advisable to truncate or snip the proceedings at the stage of
Section 227 of the Code itself”
Madan Lal Kapoor (the respondent-complainant), before the High Court, had
relied upon the judgment in State of Orissa Vs. Debendra Nath Padhi (2005)
1 SCC 568, to contend that the judgment relied upon by the Additional
Sessions Judge, Delhi, having been overruled, had resulted in an erroneous
conclusion.
Sh. Satish Mehra vs Delhi Administration & Anr on 31 July, 1996
18. As against the submission advanced on behalf of Madan Lal Kapoor (the
respondent-complainant), the appellants/accused contended, that the Court
was justified in considering the material on the record of the case, and on
the basis thereof, to arrive at a just and reasonable conclusion. In this
behalf, it was averred that the post-mortem report, the report of the
Central Forensic Science Laboratory, the inquest proceedings recorded by
the SDM, Delhi, and the letters addressed by the family members of the
complainant (duly noticed in the inquest proceedings), were a part of the
record of the case, and as such, were to be taken into consideration while
passing the orders contemplated under Sections 227 and 228 of the Cr.P.C.
The submission advanced on behalf of Madan Lal Kapoor (the respondent-
complainant) before the High Court, was accepted. The High Court arrived
at the conclusion, that the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi had
erroneously placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Court in
Satish Mehra Vs. Delhi Administration (supra), which had already been
overruled by the judgment rendered by a larger Bench in State of Orissa Vs.
Debendra Nath Padhi (supra).