A.D.KOSHAL, D.A.DESAI, R.S.PATHAK, S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, V.R.KRISHNA IYER
P. S. R. Sadhanantham – Appellant
Versus
Arunachalam – Respondent
JUDGMENT
KRISHNA IYER, J. (for himself and on behalf of S. M. Fazal Ali and D. A. Desai, JJ.) :- Is it constitutionally valid or desirable on principle to permit a private citizen, who has but loose nexus with the victim of a crime, to invoke the special power under Art. 136 of the Constitution for leave to appeal against an acquittal of the alleged criminal thereby putting in peril his life or liberty in the absence of any legislative provision arming such officious outsider with the right to appeal? This issue, profound on its face but unsound on reflection, falls for decision in this writ petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution. The facts compressed into a single sentence, are that the petitioner was acquitted of a murder charge by the High Court in appeal but the brother of the deceased - not the State nor even the first informant - moved this Court under Art. 136, got leave and had his appeal heard which resulted in the petitioner (accused) being convicted and sentenced to life term under S.302, I.P.C. The present contention urged, to upset that conviction, is that the leave to appeal and the subsequent proceedings were unconstitutional as violative of Article 21 - the proc
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.