Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: dharma hindu law Court: jharkhand Year: 2000 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.027 seconds)

Dec 18 2000 (HC)

State of Bihar Vs. Surendra Singh Rautela Alias Bengali

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Dec-18-2000

Reported in : 2001(49)BLJR78; 2001CriLJ1650

..... that a sentence or pattern of sentence which fails to take due account of the gravity of the offence can seriously undermine respect for law. it is the duty of the court to impose a proper punishment depending upon the degree of criminality and desirability to impose such punishment ..... accused for infliction of extreme penalty of death. proceeding before the high court in such cases require appraisal and reassessment of the entire facts and law so that it may come to its independent conclusion. 36. in the case of earabhadrappa v. state of karnataka, air 1983 sc 446, ..... v. state of andhra pradesh, (1974 sc 799), their lordships observed as under : 'let us crystallise the positive indicators against death sentence under indian law currently. where the murderer is too young or too old, the clemency of penal justice helps him. where the offender suffers from socio-economic, psychic ..... doubtful. the normal course of the human conduct would be that while narrating a particular incident there may occur minor discrepancies, such discrepancies in law may render credential to the depositions. parrot-like statements are disfavoured by the courts. in order to ascertain as to whether the discrepancy pointed ..... is up held by this court then in no circumstance the death sentence of the appellant surendra singh rautela alias bengali can be sustained in law. 11. mr. laljee sahay, learned counsel for the state, on the other hand, supported the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 2000 (HC)

Chhotanagpur Refractories Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-20-2000

Reported in : 2001(49)BLJR36

..... have filed a detailed petition before the joint commissioner of commercial taxes but the latter rejected the aforesaid petition on the ground that the same is not in accordance with law. 4. the respondent-commercial taxes department filed a counter affidavit stating, inter alia, that the petitioner cannot avail the facilities of deferment of tax on the ground that such facilities .....

Tag this Judgment!


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