Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Vikram Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Vikram Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Sep 16, 1989
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/764104

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 298 of 1989
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code - Sections 301 & 326 and Criminal Procedure Code--Framing of charge--Brief order not mentioning evidence and accusations--Held, Sessions Judge is directed to pan speaking order in matter of framing charge.;Order Accordingly -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vikram Singh

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
1989WLN(UC)354

Excerpt

penal code - sections 301 & 326 and criminal procedure code--framing of charge--brief order not mentioning evidence and accusations--held, sessions judge is directed to pan speaking order in matter of framing charge.;order accordingly - farooq hasan, j.1. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.2. it has been contended by mr. garg that the learned sessions judge while passing the impugned order did not consider the matter in accordance with the provisions contained in section 228, cr.p.c. and has passed a very brief order mentioning nothing about evidence and the accusation so also the reason as to how the petitioner can be charged under section 307, ipc and section 326, ipc.3. it is thus clear that the order dated 8-3-1989 is not a speaking order and, therefore, it is set aside and the learned sessions judge, bikaner is directed to which consider the matter of framing of the charge. it is expected that the sessions judge will pass a speaking order after going through the material on record, and further expected that in future also he will not pass any such order in a mechanical way.

Full Judgment

Farooq Hasan, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

2. It has been contended by Mr. Garg that the learned Sessions Judge while passing the impugned order did not consider the matter in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 228, Cr.P.C. and has passed a very brief order mentioning nothing about evidence and the accusation so also the reason as to how the petitioner can be charged under Section 307, IPC and Section 326, IPC.

3. It is thus clear that the order dated 8-3-1989 is not a speaking order and, therefore, it is set aside and the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner is directed to which consider the matter of framing of the charge. It is expected that the Sessions Judge will pass a speaking order after going through the material on record, and further expected that in future also he will not pass any such order in a mechanical way.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial