Judgments - Murder
DEVRAJ Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH - IPC - Section 302, 201
MUTHURAMALINGAM & ORS. Vs. STATE REP.BY INSP.OF POLICE
“Whether consecutive life sentences can be awarded to a convict on being found guilty of a series of murders for which he has been tried in a single trial?.” 17. The legal position is, thus, fairly well settled that imprisonment for life is a sentence for the remainder of the life of the offender unless of course the remaining sentence is commuted or remitted by the competent authority. That being Full Judgment
MEERA MYDEEN ETC.ETC. Vs. STATE OF T.NADU
Dr. P.S. Thakur versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh - Murder
Dr. P.S. Thakur versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh - Murder Full Judgment
STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU - Murder
10) The courts below have to be extremely careful when they deal with a dying declaration as the maker thereof is not available for the cross- examination which poses a great difficulty to the accused person. A mechanical approach in relying upon a dying declaration just because it is there is extremely dangerous. The court has to examine a dying Full Judgment
MUMTAZ @ MUNTYAZ Vs. STATE OF U.P.(NOW UTTARKHAND) - Murder
PRAFUL SUDHAKAR PRAB Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Murder
RAJU DEVADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Murder
JAMNADAS Vs. STATE OF M.P - Murder, Dowry Death, Cruelty.
NARENDER KUMAR AHLAWAT V/s STATE (NCT OF DELHI) - on bail,murder
PRAGNA PARAMITA PRAHARAJ Vs. STATE OF ORISSA
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. FIROZ KHAN @ ARIF KHAN
Held We are constrained to observe that the High Court grossly erred in passing the impugned order without assigning any reason. In our considered opinion, it was a clear case of total non application of mind to the case by the learned Judges because the order impugned neither sets out the facts nor the submissions of the parties nor the findings and nor the reasons as to why the leave to file appeal is declined to the appellant. We, therefore, disapprove Full Judgment
RAMBRAKSH @ JALIM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
MOHD.JALEES ANSARI & ORS. Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
HARIJAN JIVRAJBHAI BADHABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAJIV JASSI
PRABHAKAR VITHAL GHOLVE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
R.RACHAIAH Vs. HOME SECRETARY, BANGALORE
The bare reading of Section 216 reveals that though it is permissible for any Court to alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced, certain safeguards, looking into the interest of the accused person who is charged with the additional charge or with the alteration of the additional charge, are also provided specifically under sub-sections (3) and 4 of Section 216 of the Code. Sub-section(3), in no Full Judgment