Total Pageviews

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

S.279 and 304-A--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.401--Motor Accident--Rash and Negligent Driving--Acquittal--Eye witnesses--Alleged witnesses, brother of deceased and Panch neither accompanied injured to hospital or had gone to report matter to Police Station--Ruqa sent by doctor recorded that unknown injured was brought by driver of offending bus--Sequence of events clearly established that no body witnessed occurrence--No other cogent independent evidence to prove that accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of petitioner--Accused acquitted.; Zora Singh v. State of Punjab ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 610
S.279 and 304-A--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.401--Rash and Negligent Driving--Conviction--Eye witnesses--FIR--Delay--No explanation as to why alleged eyewitnesses did not report matter to police on same day--Delay of more than 15 hours in recording FIR remained unexplained casts a shadow of doubt on prosecution version--Prosecution failed to prove charge against petitioner, driver of offending bus--Petitioner deserves benefit of reasonable doubt and is acquitted.; Zora Singh v. State of Punjab ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 610
S.279/304-A--Motor Accident--Rash and negligent driving--Acquittal--Death of 1½ years child--Court to examine whether parents of child had acted like prudent person and had taken care of child--Parents had not taken care of their child--Accused acquitted.; Keshav v. State of Haryana ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 614
S.279/304-A--Motor Accident--Rash and negligent driving--Acquittal--Death of 1½ years child who came below front tyre of bus--Parents of child were standing on side of road were exchanging pleasantries (joking remarks) with their uncle--Mother was carrying a Gathri on her head and a hen was lying on ground--Child could not be restrained and she moved towards road--Moreover, neither draftsman nor photographer examined--Court unable to decide whether accident took place on side of road or in middle of road--Witnesses not deposed that driver was driving vehicle rashly or negligently--Thus, it can be safely inferred that parents had not taken care of their child aged 1½ years--In totality of these circumstances, it will not be safe to upheld conviction of petitioner--Petitioner granted benefit of doubt and acquitted of charges.; Keshav v. State of Haryana ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 614
S.302, 307 r/w S.34--Murder--Acquittal--Appeal against--Occurrence took place on 1.7.1996 at 4 p.m.--FIR registered at 5.45 p.m.--Special report sent to Illaqa Magistrate after 4 hours of occurrence--Delay in registration of FIR and sending special report to Illaqa Magistrate is fatal to prosecution case--Accused acquitted.; Union Territory, Chandigarh v. Mohan Lal & Ors.; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 624
S.302, 364-A, 120-B and 201--Murder--Kidnapping for ransom and murder--Death sentence--Deceased was the only son on his parents and incident of his kidnapping had sent a shock wave throughout the town -Not a case of murder simpliciter but the accused persons have also been held guilty under Section 364-A IPC which was brought in statute book in order to curb the menace of kidnapping for ransom and even independent of penal provisions of Section 302 IPC--No iota of evidence to show enmity between parties, therefore, this is a case of cold blooded murder committed only in order to extract a heavy ransom of Rs.50,00,000/- which is evident from evidence of (PW27) father of the deceased that every time, while calling on phones, the kidnapper gave him threats that if he wanted his son to be alive, he should immediately arrange for ransom amount of Rs.50,00,000/-. It appears as the police became active, the accused could not extract the ransom and out of panic, poisoned the boy to death by administering heavy dozes of chloroform and fortwin--No interference to the conviction/sentence orders of the trial Court against the A-1 and A-2--Sentence of A3 converted from death sentence to life imprisonment.; Vikram Singh v. State of Punjab ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 561 (SC)
S.302. 307 r/w S.34--Murder--Appeal against--Acquittal--Husband killing wife alongwith brother by strangulation with rope--Number of persons were present at scene of occurrence but no one rescued deceased from clutches of accused--No independent witness examined despite availability--Withholding of eye witnesses from examination creates doubt about prosecution story when weapon of crime i.e. rope put around neck of deceased not recovered--Identify of deceased was declared unknown when brought to hospital--Absence of injury marks on body parts where they should have been under facts and circumstances sufficient ground to disbelieve and discard prosecution story--Deliberate improvements made by witnesses while stepping into witness box so as to confirm prosecution version--Said concocted version has left marks of doubt and probabilities--No interference in order of acquittal. ; Union Territory, Chandigarh v. Mohan Lal & Ors.; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 624
S.306--Abetment to suicide--Conviction--Reduction of sentence--Death of wife due to 100% burns--Circumstances considered while reducing sentence to already undergone i.e. one year are:-
(i) Marriage of appellant at time of occurrence was 20 years old. He was having three children of 14, 12 and 8 years of age at time of occurrence and family of deceased was dependent upon appellant.
(ii) Mother and two brothers of the deceased deposed in favour of the appellant.
(iii) Two sons and one daughter and their family would suffer from a scar in case appellant is sent behind bars.
(iv) Appellant has suffered a protracted trial of 15 years.; Rajeshwar v. State of Haryana; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 603
S.306--Abetment to Suicide--Dying declaration--Conviction--Death of wife due to 100% deep burns--Allegation of illicit relations by wife against husband in 20 years old marriage--Fact recorded in dying declaration that deceased used to beat his wife daily and on day of occurrence also thrashed her cannot be ignored--Giving beating was immediate cause which led deceased to commit suicide--Thus appellant was rightly convicted.; Rajeshwar v. State of Haryana; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 603
S.307, 324 r/w S.34--Attempt to murder--Conviction--Ocular version put forward by eye witnesses duly corroborated by medical evidence--FSL report supports ocular account that shot was fired from 12 bore DBBL gun--Lodging of FIR prompt--Case proved beyond reasonable doubt--Conviction upheld--However keeping in view facts and circumstances period of sentence already undergone would meet end of justice.; Chhota Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 623
S.307, 324, 323, 148 and 149--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Attempt to murder--Quashing of FIR--On basis of compromise--Parties decided to live in peace--No useful purpose would be served in allowing these proceedings to continue--FIR qua petitioner quashed.; Baljinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 618
S.364-A, 302, 120-B & 201--Kidnapping for ransom--Murder--Death sentence--Parliament in dealing with kidnapping for ransom a crime which called for a deterrent punishment, even in a case where the kidnapping had not resulted in the death of the victim--The statistics further reveal that kidnapping for ransom has become a lucrative and thriving industry all over the country which must be dealt with, in the harshest possible manner and an obligation rests on Courts as well--Courts to lend a helping hand in that direction--Not only was victim kidnapped for ransom which acts which would by itself attract the death penalty but he was murdered in the process--Death sentence could be awarded even in a case of kidnapping and murder based on circumstantial evidence.; Vikram Singh v. State of Punjab ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 561 (SC)
S.417--Forgery--Impersonation--Acquittal--Sale deed--Original owners who were allegedly impersonated not examined by prosecution--No efforts made to summon these witnesses--They could be said to be material witnesses to prove that they never executed sale deed in respect of property in dispute--No evidence produced to prove that photo impressions of photographs on copies of sale deeds were not of original owners--No effort made to get compared questioned thumb impressions of alleged vendors on copies of sale deeds with standard or specimen thumb impressions of original owners--Statement of witnesses that original owners were not living in village and their whereabouts were not known could not be said to be sufficient to prove that they did not execute sale deed--They were not attesting witnesses of sale deeds--Their evidence of no avail to prove that original owners were impersonated-Court below wrong in coming to conclusion that it was duty of accused to produce original owners--Findings, that accused committed offence u/s 419, 420, 467, 468 and 120-B without any evidence liable to be set aside.; Budh Ram v. State of Haryana ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 631
S.452, 448, 506 and 151--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Criminal trespass--Quashing of FIR--Allegations of taking forcible possession of Land--Complainant having lost up to Supreme Court on civil side is abusing process of law and Court by filing FIR so as to defeat vested civil rights of petitioners--Earlier FIR against predecessor-in-interest of petitioner on similar allegations of taking forcible possession of Land culminated in acquittal of all accused persons--Continuance of proceeding would be abuse of process of Court--FIR quashed. ; Purshotam Saini & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 577
S.452, 448, 506 and 151--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Quashing of FIR--Criminal Tresspass--Allegations of taking forcible possession of Land--Complainant on civil side lost upto Supreme Court--Earlier FIR lodged against predecessor-in-interest of petition on similar allegation culminated into acquittal of accused--Filing of FIR to defeat vested civil rights of petitioner quashed.; Purshotam Saini & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 577;
S.467, 468, 419, 420 & 109--Forgery--Acquittal--Offence of forgery can only be committed in relation to original documents and not with respect to copies thereof--Case of prosecution that ‘D’ impersonated co-owner and got sale executed deed in her favour--Original sale deeds admittedly in respect where forgery was allegedly committed did not see light of day at any point of time during trial of the case--Only copies thereof were produced on record--No explanation as to why original sale deeds were not recovered from vendees during course of investigation--In absence of production of original document no offences under Section 467, 468, 419, 420 and 109 were committed by accused--No legally admissible evidence on basis whereof conviction could be recorded--Petitioners acquitted.; Budh Ram v. State of Haryana ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 631