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

1954 Supreme(SC) 48

GHULAM HASAN, M. C. MAHAJAN, VIVIAN BOSE
Hem Raj Devilal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Ajmer – Respondent


Advocates:
B.D.SHARMA, BAKSHI TEK CHAND, BHAGVANT SINGH, K.N.AGRAWAL, R.H.Dhebar, RAJENDER NARAIN

Judgment

MAHAJAN, C.J.I.: Criminal Appeals Nos. 58 and 87 of 1953 relate to the same occurrence, and arise out of a common judgment delivered by the Judicial Commissioner of Ajmer. Both of them are before us by special leave granted by this Court on different occasions.

2. Unless it is shown that exceptional and special circumstances exist that substantial and grave injustice has been done and the case in question presents features of sufficient gravity to warrant a review of the decision appealed against, this Court does not exercise its overriding powers under Article 136 (1) of the Constitution and the circumstance that because the appeal has been admitted by special leave does not entitle the appellant to open out the whole case and contest all the findings of fact and raise every point which could be raised in the High Court. Even at the final hearing only those points can be urged which are fit to be urged at the preliminary stage when the leave to appeal is asked for. The question for consideration is whether this test is satisfied in either of these two appeals. After hearing the learned counsel in both the appeals we are satisfied that none of them raise any questions which




























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