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

1965 Supreme(SC) 143

M.HIDAYATULLAH, K.SUBBA RAO, J.R.MUDHOLKAR, A.K.SARKAR
Mahadev Sharma Tunuk Lal Mondal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
K.K.SINHA, S.P.Varma, Udaipratap Singh

Judgement

HIDAYATULLAH, J.: In these two appeals by nine persons, who have been convicted under S. 302/149, Indian Penal Code, special leave is limited to one question of law, namely, whether the accused could be legally convicted under the above sections when they were not charged and convicted under S. 147 or S. 148 of the Indian Penal Code? It appears from the judgment under appeal that there was a difference of opinion on this point in the High Court at Patna and the appeals in the High Court were disposed of by a Full Bench which held that charges under Ss. 147 and 148 were not necessary before conviction under S. 302, Indian Penal Code could be made with the aid of S. 149, Indian Penal Code.

2. In view of the limited nature of the appeals only the essential facts may be stated. The person who lost his life was one Misari who was related to some of the accused persons. In the past there were other incidents. In 1955 one Ajablal was murdered and some of the present accused were prosecuted but were acquitted. Subsequently, one Baldeo Sharma was murdered and some of the prosecution witnesses in this case were charged with that offence. At the time of the judgment under appeal (Augu

















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