Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: crpc Court: supreme Year: 1979 Page 1 of about 610 results (0.062 seconds)

Feb 09 1979 (SC)

Rajendra Prasad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-09-1979

Reported in : AIR1979SC916; 1979CriLJ792; (1979)3SCC646; [1979]3SCR78

..... a sentence of death and a sentence of imprisonment for life. prior to the amendment of s. 367, sub-s. (5) of the code of criminal procedure, 1898 by the criminal procedure code (amendment) act, 1955 it was a well settled principle that where a person was convicted for an offence of murder, the court was ..... legally permissible for this court to give a definite connotation to the expression "special reasons" occurring in s. 354, sub-s. (3) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973. it is difficult to put "special reasons" in a straight- jacket. each case must depend on its own particular facts. the question of ..... the culprit. in the three cases before us, there were 'special reasons' within the meaning of s. 354, sub-s. (3) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 for the passing of the death sentence in each and, therefore, the high courts were justified in confirming the death sentence passed under s. 368 ..... or (d) if the murder is of a person who had acted in the lawful discharge of this duty under section 43 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973, or who had rendered assistance to a magistrate or a police officer demanding his aid or requiring his assistance under section 37 or ..... murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine" sub-section (3) of s. 354 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973, enacts: "when the conviction is for an offence punishable with death or, in the alternative, with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 1979 (SC)

V.C. Shukla Vs. State Through C.B.i.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-07-1979

Reported in : AIR1980SC962; 1980CriLJ690; 1980Supp(1)SCC92; [1980]2SCR380

..... injustice by activist attitude and pragmatic interpretation found a third class of orders neither interlocutory nor final but intermediate and therefore outside the bar of s. 397(2) of the code of criminal procedure. but the test remains unaltered that every interlocutory order merely because it disposes of an aspect, nay a vital aspect in the course of a pending proceeding even adversely ..... in fact it has been departed from and, therefore, the later decisions specifically rendered in the context of the expression 'interlocutory order' as used in section 397(2) of the code of criminal procedure, would hold the field. in amar nath & ors. v. state of haryana & ors. the matter came before this court against an order of the magistrate issuing summons upon a ..... whether or not the concept or connotation of the word 'interlocutory' in section 11 purports to convey the same meaning as given to it in section 397(2) of the code of criminal procedure", the two brother judges have made a "further mention" as follows,- "..... although we would have normally admitted this appeal but as the admission of the appeal itself would imply ..... s. 397(2), they were correctly decided and would have no application to the interpretation of s. 11(1) of the act, which expressly excludes the provisions of the code of criminal procedure by virtue of the non obstante clause. we feel that one reason why no appeal was provided against an interlocutory order like framing of the charges, as construed by us .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1979 (SC)

Rajput Ruda Meha and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-05-1979

Reported in : AIR1980SC1707; 1980CriLJ1246; (1980)0GLR40; (1980)1SCC677; [1980]2SCR353

..... before the constitution bench, there was any reference to the validity of section 384 of the crpc. neither was it pleaded during the arguments that section 384 of the crpc is ultra vires of the constitution. as the question of validity of section 384 the code, of criminal procedure was neither raised nor argued, a discussion by the court after 'pondering over the issue in ..... act of parliament and (3) an appeal under the supreme court (enlargement of criminal appellate jurisdiction) act, 1970 cannot be dismissed summarily without calling for the records ordering notice to the state and without giving reasons. when the petition for leave to adduce additional ..... of order xxi of the supreme court rules empowering the court to dismiss the appeal summarily is ultra vires being inconsistent with the provisions of the supreme court (enlargement pf criminal appellate jurisdiction) act, 1970; (2) the power of the supreme court to frame rules under article 145 of the constitution cannot be extended to annul the rights conferred under an ..... the power of the courts to dismiss an appeal summarily under section 384 of the crpc has been referred. in that case an appeal was preferred to this court under section 379 of the crpc, 1973 read with section 2(a) of the supreme court (enlargement of criminal appellate jurisdiction) act, 1970. the appeal was listed for preliminary hearing under rule 15(1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 1979 (SC)

Bishnu Deo Shaw Vs. State of West Bengal

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-22-1979

Reported in : AIR1979SC964; 1979CriLJ841; (1979)3SCC714; [1979]3SCR355

..... must necessarily play the most prominent role in determining the sentence to be awarded. special reasons must have some relation to these factors.27. criminal justice is not a computer machine. it deals with complex human problems and diverse human beings. it deals with persons who are otherwise like ..... indication by the legislature that reformation and rehabilitation of offenders, and not mere deterrence, are now among the foremost objects of the administration of criminal justice in our country. section 361 and section 354(3) have both entered the statute book at the same time and they are part ..... question of capital punishment, the laws and practices relating thereto and the effects of capital punishment and the abolition thereof on the rate of criminality. according to the report all the information available appeared to confirm that neither total abolition of the death penalty nor its partial abolition in ..... the denunciatory theory, as propounded, is nothing but an echo of the retributive theory as explained by stephen who had said earlier : 'the criminal law stands to the passion of revenge in much the same relation as marriage to the sexual appetite'. the denunciatory theory is as inadequate as ..... and the sentence of death could be imposed only if there were aggravating circumstances. in the crpc of 1973, there is a further swing towards life imprisonment. section 354(3) of the new code now provides:when the conviction is for an offence punishable with death or, in the alternative .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 04 1979 (SC)

Dalbir Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-04-1979

Reported in : AIR1962SC1106a; 1979CriLJ1058; (1979)3SCC745; [1979]3SCR1059

..... .33. in my view, the high court was justified in confirming the death sentences passed under section 368(a) of the code, being satisfied that there were 'special reasons' within the meaning of section 354, sub-section (3) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973, i would say that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the award of death sentence to the ..... swung to the other extreme and the guideline given is that the 'special reasons' must relate 'not to the crime as such but to the criminal' for which there is no warrant in section 354(3) of the crpc,30. i may also venture to say, the obsession to get the death penalty abolished from the statute book, i.e., indian penal ..... length in the same judgment and, going by them, there is hardly any warrant for judicial extinguishment of two precious indian lives. section 302 of the penal code, read with section 354(3) of the criminal procedure code, demands special reasons for awarding the graver sentence, and to borrow the reasoning in rajendra prasad's case.'special reasons' necessary for imposing death penalty must ..... with section 354(3) of the crpc. section 302 of the indian penal code gives a choice while section 354(3) of the code merely requires 'special reasons' to be indicated for imposing the death penalty. nothing is stated whether the 'special reasons' should relate to the criminal or the crime. in the absence of any specific indication in that behalf 'special reasons' would .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 1979 (SC)

M. Karunanidhi Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-20-1979

Reported in : AIR1979SC898; 1979CriLJ773; (1979)3SCC431; [1979]3SCR254

..... after the expiry of one year from the date on which the action complained against becomes known to the complainant.10. procedure in respect of investigation of criminal misconduct : (1) the procedure for conducting any investigation in respect of a complaint of criminal misconduct against any public man shall be such as the commissioner or the additional commissioner considers appropriate in the circumstances of ..... court by the appellant for quashing the order of the special judge, madras dated 4th january, 1977 refusing to discharge the appellant under section 239 of the crpc (hereinafter referred to as the code).2. the facts of the case have been detailed in the judgment of the high court and it is not necessary for us to repeat the same all ..... 'in addition to and hot in derogation with any other law for the time being in force' which manifestly includes the central acts, namely, the indian penal code, the corruption act and the criminal law (amendment) act. thus, the legislature about a month before the main act came into force clearly declared its intention that there would be no question of ..... the necessary copies of the records were furnished to the appellant. the appellant on appearing before the special judge filed an application for discharging him under section 239 of the code on the ground that the prosecution against him suffered from various legal and constitutional infirmities. the special judge, however, after hearing counsel for the parties rejected the application of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 10 1979 (SC)

Ram Lal Narang Vs. State (Delhi Administration)

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-10-1979

Reported in : AIR1979SC1791; 1979CriLJ1346; (1979)2SCC322; [1979]2SCR923

..... of the offence, there was sufficient ground for proceeding, the magistrate was required to issue the necessary process to secure the attendance of the accused (section 204 criminal procedure code). the scheme of the code thus was that the first information report was followed by investigation, the investigation led to the submission of a report to the magistrate, the magistrate took cognizance of ..... 'suspending cognizance' suggested by the high court of punjab and haryana does not appear to us to be warranted by the provisions of the criminal procedure code.22. anyone acquainted with the day today working of the criminal courts will be alive to the practical necessity of the police possessing the power to make further investigation and submit a supplemental report. it is ..... court of any offence. we think that in the interests of the independence of the magistracy and the judiciary, in the interests of the purity of the administration of criminal justice and in the interests of the comity of the various agencies and institutions entrusted with different stages of such administration, it would ordinarily be desirable that the police should ..... a. ramamurthi naidu , where phillips and krishnan, jj., observed as follows:another contention is put forward that when a report of investigation has been sent in under section 173, criminal p.c., the police has no further powers of investigation, but this argument may be briefly met by the remark that the number of investigations into a crime is not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1979 (SC)

B. Saha and ors. Vs. M.S. Kochar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-27-1979

Reported in : AIR1979SC1841; 1979CriLJ1367; 1979CENCUS461D; (1979)4SCC177; [1980]1SCR111

..... the present case, sanction of the appropriate government was not necessary for the prosecution of the appellants for an offence under sections 409/120-b, indian penal code, because the alleged act of criminal misappropriation complained of was not committed by them while they were acting or purporting to act in the discharge of their official duty, the commission of the offence ..... [1972] 3 s.c.r. 89 wherein it has been held that sanction under section 197, criminal procedure code for prosecution for an offence under section 409, indian penal code was not. necessary. in om parkash gupta's case (ibid) it was held that a public servant committing criminal breach of trust does not normally act in his capacity as a public servant. since this ..... the act complained of is subsequent dishonest misappropriation or conversion of those goods by the appellants, which is the second necessary element of the offence of criminal breach of trust under section 409, indian penal code. could it be said, that the act of dishonest misappropriation or conversion complained of bore such a'n integral relation to the duty of the ..... special facts it can be said that the act of criminal misappropriation or conversion complained of is inseparably intertwined with the performance of the official duty of the accused and therefore, sanction under section 197(1) of the crpc for prosecution of the accused for an offence under section 409, indian penal code was necessary.24. shreekantiah rammayya (supra) was a case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 16 1979 (SC)

Bahadul Alias Ghanshyam Padhan Vs. State of Orissa

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-16-1979

Reported in : AIR1979SC1262; 48(1979)CLT456(SC); 1979CriLJ1075; (1979)4SCC346; 1979(11)LC348(SC)

..... voluntary and he based his conviction on the confession alone corroborated as it was by the evidence of 11, 12 before a magistrate under section 164 of the crpc. the appellant filed an appeal in the high court which did not agree with the finding of the sessions judge on the assessment of oral evidence led by the prosecution ..... , j. 1. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the orissa high court dated 16th march, 1972, upholding the conviction of the appellant under section 302 ipc and sentence of life imprisonment awarded by the sessions judge. a detailed narrative of the prosecution case is to be found in the judgement of the high court and it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 1979 (SC)

Dhanabal and anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-13-1979

Reported in : AIR1980SC628; 1980CriLJ439; (1980)2SCC84; [1980]2SCR491

..... signed it. the evidence given in the committal court was transposed to the record of the sessions court under section 288 of the crpc.9. the procedure adopted was challenged on the ground that section 288 contemplates that the evidence given during committal proceedings can be treated as evidence in ..... subsequent evidence before the committal court. equally unsustainable is the plea of the learned counsel that a statement recorded under section 288 of the crpc of one witness cannot corroborate the statement of another witness under section 288. the statements are treated as substantive evidence in law and ..... true and could be relied on' and proceeded to observe 'that as there are mere statements admitted in evidence under section 288 of the crpc than one, the evidence of one witness before the committing court is corroborated by that given by others'. mr. mulla, learned counsel, submitted ..... of the admission that it was made. hidayatullah, c.j. in state of rajasthan v. kartar singh : 1970crilj1144 , while dealing with the procedure to be adopted in treating the statement in the committal court as substantive evidence observed that the witnesses should be confronted with their statements in the ..... 1974 on the file of sessions judge, south arcot division, against their conviction and sentence imposed by the high court of judicature at madras in criminal appeal no. 823 of 1974 dated 1st september, 1975.2. the two appellants and muthuthamizaharasan were accused nos. 1-3 in the sessions court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //