SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 530

G.B.PATTANAIK, N.S.HEGDE
State of Karnataka – Appellant
Versus
Muddappa – Respondent


ORDER

1. This appeal is directed against Accused 3 alone who was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge under Section 302 IPC. But, on appeal, the High Court set aside the conviction under Section 302 IPC and instead, convicted him under Section 304 Part II IPC. For such conviction, the High Court also examined the circumstances under which the blow was inflicted by the accused on the deceased and, on consideration of the provisions of Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, the High Court, instead of sentencing him, directed to release the accused on admonition.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant is not in a position to assail the acquittal of the accused under Section 302 IPC, but he vehemently contends that the Court did not bear in mind germane considerations for releasing the accused on probation after convicting him under Section 304 Part II IPC. Whether the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act could be extended in any particular case depends upon the circumstances of that case. Admittedly, there is no statutory bar for application of the Act to an offence under Section 304 Part II where the



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top