1860

Defamation ? -Penal Code, 1860 — S. 499 Exception 8 and S. 500 r/w S. 52

In case of complaint filed before authority concerned with accusations of creating nuisance by opening shop that attracted anti-social elements and road romeos, and created all sorts of problems, whether could amount to defamation, discussed. Applicability of S. 499 Exception 8, determined. The learned Magistrate committed a serious error in taking cognizance on a complaint, […]

Defamation ? -Penal Code, 1860 — S. 499 Exception 8 and S. 500 r/w S. 52 Read More »

Liability of accessory accused other than main assailant who inflicted the fatal blow- Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 323/34 r/w Ss. 302/34

A Complaint dated 13.04.2012 at 8:10 a.m was filed with the Koheer Police Station, Telangana, stating that on 08.04.20I2 at 9.00 p.m, accused 1-6 came to the Complainant’s house, physically assaulted his Mother, (Deceased), A1 further kicked forcefully on her stomach, due to which, she fell on ground and subsequently died in the hospital on

Liability of accessory accused other than main assailant who inflicted the fatal blow- Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 323/34 r/w Ss. 302/34 Read More »

Gang rape and wrongful confinement -Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 376(2)(g) and 342 — Allegations — Determination of Culpability of appellant-accused

It is a case in which rape was committed on the prosecutrix by three accused, namely Avtar Singh, Sohal Lal, and Gian Singh, though one of them was acquitted by the trial court. However, the involvement of the appellants was proved beyond any doubt. Plea taken by them in defence was not found to be

Gang rape and wrongful confinement -Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 376(2)(g) and 342 — Allegations — Determination of Culpability of appellant-accused Read More »

Penal Code, 1860— Ss. 302, 307 and 328 — When can Testimony of sole surviving victim not form the sole basis of conviction – when Other evidence coupled with such testimony, may provide sufficient basis for conviction

In this case of multiple murders, deposition of surviving victim, held, could not form sole basis of conviction, as in a number of statements recorded of such witness, name of appellant-accused surfaced only in the last. However, there was other unimpeachable evidence, particularly the recovery evidence of purchase of bottle of pesticide by accused having

Penal Code, 1860— Ss. 302, 307 and 328 — When can Testimony of sole surviving victim not form the sole basis of conviction – when Other evidence coupled with such testimony, may provide sufficient basis for conviction Read More »

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 411 r/w S. 24 — Receiving stolen property

The inevitable conclusion is that the prosecution has failed to establish that the appellant had the knowledge that articles seized from his possession are stolen goods. In Trimbak vs. State of Madhya Pradesh5, this Court discussed the essential ingredients for conviction under Section 411 of the IPC. Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, in his erudite opinion

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 411 r/w S. 24 — Receiving stolen property Read More »

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 34 — Requirements for Conviction with aid of S. 34

When a part of the evidence produced by the prosecution to bring the accused within the fold of S. 34 is disbelieved, held, the remaining part must be examined with adequate care and caution. .Both the appellants have been charged only based upon the rule of evidence available under Section 34 of the IPC. Section 34 does not constitute

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 34 — Requirements for Conviction with aid of S. 34 Read More »

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302 and 376 — Rape and murder of minor alleged — Circumstantial evidence — Last seen theory — Requirements for invocation of S. 106 of the Evidence Act

Requirements for invocation of S. 106, Evidence Act, explained. Acquittal granted to a man sentenced to death for alleged rape and murder of minor girl. Held, We cannot shy away from the fact that it is a ghastly case of rape and murder of a 6 year old child. By not conducting the investigation properly,

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302 and 376 — Rape and murder of minor alleged — Circumstantial evidence — Last seen theory — Requirements for invocation of S. 106 of the Evidence Act Read More »

error: Content is protected !!

Terms And Condition

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

  1. The user wishes to gain more information about Re Legal, its practice areas for his/her own information and use
  2. That the information provided in the website is only for personal use or reference of the visitor and is provided only on his/her specific request.
  3. That the material available for downloading on the website and other information provided on the website would not create any lawyer-client relationship.
  4. That we are not responsible for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website.
  5. That in case the visitor has any legal issues; he or she should seek independent legal advice.

The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising.