Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC700; 1992Supp(2)SCC623
1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Special leave granted.2. The grievance of the appellant-tenant is that the High Court in the proceedings of revision while granting leave to the Respondent-landlord to plead certain subsequent events, had virtually accepted the pleadings as proof in itself of the allegations which according to the respondent entitled him to possession. The trial Court had negatived the bona fides of the landlord's claim for possession. Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that it is one thing to permit a party to urge certain subsequent events but quite an other to assume, without more, that the facts so alleged are proved without the formality of an enquiry and recording of evidence. The proceedings in the High Court, says counsel, ceased to be revisional and assumed the character of a fresh trial on fresh grounds without an enquiry and trial of or evidence on those fresh grounds. Learned Counsel says that pleading and proof of the subsequent eve...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC125; 1992(2)BLJR713; 1992CriLJ105; 1991(2)SCALE779; 1993Supp(1)SCC485
ORDERS. Ratnavel Pandian and M. Fathima Beevi, JJ.1. These two appellants by name Harbans Nonia and Sheobali Nonia have preferred this criminal appeal against the judgment rendered in Criminal Appeal Nos. 331 and 366 of 1983 by the High Court of Patna confirming their conviction under Section 302 read with 4 IPC and the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed therefor. The crux of the prosecution case is that on 25.11.80 while these two appellants caught hold of the left and right hands of the Kailash Nonia (deceased herein), Shyambali Nonia on being instigated by his father Sita Ram Nonia, gave one slab with a dagger and indicted a stab wound,with the result of which the deceased died.2. Admittedly, these two appellants did not have any weapon and attacked the deceased. Nor did they even by words express their intention to cause the death of the deceased. The father of Shyambali Nonia, namely, Sita Ram Nonia, who instigated the offence died even before the committal proceedings of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC2246; 1991CriLJ3289; 1991(3)Crimes446(SC); JT1991(4)SC306; 1991(2)SCALE673; 1991Supp(2)SCC437
ORDERK. Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. There are 25 appellants in this appeal. They were tried for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302, 307, 323 and 325 all read with Section 149 IPC in respect of a rioting that took place on 24.9.1967 at 12.30 p.m. in the village Jainpur, District Gorakhpur. During the course of the said occurrence, three persons died and five persons received injuries. Most of the injuries were caused by sharp-edged weapons. It appears that there was a dispute between Hindus and Muslims of the village regarding the grove. The Hindus claimed that the grove and the pond nearby were their properties where dead bodies were cremated and according to the Muslims it was their graveyard. There was security proceedings and also proceedings were initiated under Section 145.2. While so, the wife of P.W.3, Guptar, a local Hindu, died and P.W.3 and other Hindus carried the dead body to the said pond in the give in order to cremate her body. The dug a pit and as the funer...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC2150; 1992(2)BLJR803; (1992)2CompLJ315(SC); JT1991(4)SC276; 1991(2)SCALE670; (1991)4SCC406; 1992Supp(1)SCC16; [1991]Supp1SCR219
ORDERV. Ramaswami, J.1. In this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioners have questioned the constitutional validity of Section 5 of the Poisons Act, 1919 (12 of 1919) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The grounds on which the vires of the provisions is attacked are that the section gives an unguided, unchanellised and arbitrary power to the State Government to include any substance as poison for the purpose of restriction to be imposed on the possession for sale and sale of the same. It was further contended that the restriction imposed on possession for sale and sale were not reasonable restrictions. The petitioner's have also taken the plea that though the Act is a Central enactment it is possible of unjust and unjustified discriminatory application as it is left to each State Government to determine what substance they would include as poison and regulated and the decision in one State to include the substance as poison is not automatically made applicable to th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993Supp(1)SCC459
S.R. Pandian and; M. Fathima Beevi, JJ.1. The four appellants have directed this criminal appeal questioning the correctness and validity of the impugned judgment rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 322 of 1983 on the file of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The brief facts of the case which have led to the filing of this appeal can be stated thus:Appellants 1 and 2 are brothers. Appellant 3 is the son of appellant 2 and appellant 4 is the son of appellant 1. They were all residing adjacent to the house of the deceased and complainant in this case. It transpires from the records that the parties were not on cordial terms but on the other hand, they were on inimical terms. There was an incident of quarrel on May 25, 1982 which gave rise to the filing of cross complaints between the parties.2. According to the prosecution on July 2, 1982 at about 3.15 p.m. the occurrence in question took place. On that day the deceased wanted to go to village Natrang and started proceeding to bus stop...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC717; 1992LabIC574; 1992Supp(3)SCC106
ORDERK. Jagannatha Shetty, J.1. Respondent 2 was a teacher in the appellant school. It is a recognized private school. The Secretary of the School Committee framed certain charges against the respondent and he was called upon to give explanation. The respondent in his explanation specifically pleaded that he needed an enquiry into the matter by retired educationists of the local area other than the school committee. Accepting that request a committee other than the school committee was constituted to hold an enquiry. The committee conducted the enquiry in which the respondent participated and did not raise any objection as to its jurisdiction. The committee found him guilty and submitted a report to the school committee. The school committee after obtaining approval from the Department dismissed the respondent from service. Against the dismissal Order an appeal was preferred to the Joint Director. The Joint Director set aside the Order of dismissal solely on the ground that the enquiry...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC59; 1992CriLJ1; JT1992(4)SC473; 1992Supp(2)SCC746
1. The four appellants, namely, Ram Lal Singh, Shetan Singh, Pitram and Krishan, stand convicted under Section 302 read with Sections 34, I.P.C. and 323 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and four months' rigorous imprisonment respectively. The appellants have directed this appeal canvassing the correctness of the judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana made in Criminal Appeal No. 1583/76 dated 12-11-1976, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment of the trial Court. The crux of the indictment of the prosecution is that on 16-4-1976 at about 12-50 P.M. at the Railway Station of Nangal Digrota, these appellants in furtherance of their common intention caused the death of the deceased, Smt. Shugna. It is alleged that all the appellants dragged her out of the train, while returning to her village from Tehsil Court, and that the second appellant, Shetan Singh, indiscriminately cut her with a gandasa and that in the course of the same transa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC483; 1992(40)BLJR158; 1992CriLJ518; 1991(3)Crimes444(SC); JT1991(4)SC65; 1991(2)SCALE654; 1992Supp(1)SCC727; 1992(1)LC208(SC)
ORDERK. Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. These are all connected appeals and arise out of the judgment of the Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 219 and 231 of 1981. The prosecution case is as follows.2. On 25.3.1978 at about 11 A.M. persons of several villages gathered in village Bisharam four miles away from P.S. Dinara in District Rohtas. They were variously armed with, rifles, guns, bhalas, lathis etc and the mob was searching for some persons in the village and the villagers fled in all directions. It is also alleged that the mob set some houses on fire and ransacked them. On receiving information P. W. 8, a Police Officer came there and the mop fled. According to the prosecution in all four persons were killed. Two of them got burnt and the other two were not traced. Therefore according to the prosecution those two must have died or must have been abducted by the mob. The prosecution examined P.Ws.l to 12, 14, 16, 18, 22 and 30 as eye-witnesses. After completion of the investigation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992Supp(2)SCC233
1. The above appeal is preferred by the appellant, Madanlal who was aged about 18 at the time of occurrence challenging the correctness of the judgment made by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. A. No. 576 of 1976 whereunder he stands convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The High Court on appeal has confirmed the conviction and the sentence. Hence this appeal. 2. It is seen from the records that leave was granted limiting the question to the nature of offence and quantum of sentence. Facts of the case are clearly set out in the judgment of the trial court as well as of the High Court. It is, therefore, not necessary for us to reiterate the same except stating that the appellant on August 27, 1975 at about 9 p.m. in the area of village Khuyan Sarwar committed the murder of Ramlal by beating him with the handle of a hand pump and causing him serious injuries due to which injuries he died three days thereafter, namely, on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992Supp(3)SCC45
ORDER 1. The three appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 259 of 1979 and the sole appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 258 of 1979 along with two others were indicted of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Sections 149 and 325 read with Section 149 IPC on the allegations that they all formed themselves into unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of that assembly they committed murder of Preetam Singh and caused grievous hurt to PW 4. As the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 258 of 1979, namely, Pyare Singh was absconding, the case as against the three appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 259 of 1979 was split up and the three appellants along with two others were tried for the above-said offences and convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 325 read with Section 149 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and 3 years' rigorous imprisonment respectively and further the appellants 1 and 3 and another were convicted u...
Tag this Judgment!