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

1970 Supreme(SC) 116

A.N.RAY, I.D.DUA
Siddanna Apparao Patil – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
For petitioner:Mr. R.K. Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Prem Sadotra, Advocate.
For respondents: Mr. R. Koul, CGSC.

Judgment

RAY, J.:- This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High court of Bombay dated 5th December, 1966 dismissing in limine the appeal preferred against the judgment and order dated 16th August, 1966 passed by the Session Judge, Sholapur. The High Court by an order dated 3rd April, 1967 also refused leave to appeal to this Court.

2. The appellant was accused No. 1. He was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

3. Broadly stated, the charge against the appellant was that he in conspiracy with his brother, accused No. 2, committed murder of Rayansidhappa Shivappa Patil and Mahadeo Sidran Patil. The defence of both the appellant and his brother was one of total denial.

4. The right to prefer an appeal from sentence of Court of Sessions is conferred by Section 410 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The right to appeal is one both on a matter of fact and a matter of law. It is only in cases where there is a trial by jury that the right to appeal is under Section 418 confined only to a matter of law.

5. This Court in several decisions dealt with Section 410 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the r











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