SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. Ahmadi, C.J.I. and S.C. Sen, J.
Jagir Singh/Sukhvir Singh & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. Etc. - Respondents
W.P. (Crl.) No. 346 of 1994, 364-376 of 1994
Decided On : 30-1-1995
JUDGMENT :
1. Pursuant to our order dated 23rd January, 1995 the relevant inquiry papers have been placed for perusal and the charge- sheet filed by the State against 41 persons is also appended to the affidavit of Sh. Rajesh Kumar Shrivastava, the Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch CID UP Headquarters, Lucknow. Mr. Sodhi, learned counsel for the petitioners has satisfied himself that the investigation was carried out in a proper manner and he only hopes that the matter will be persuade with the same zeal at the trial. We are sure that the Presiding Judge before whom the trial will be conducted will ensure that any effort to keep back the material from the Court to interfere with evidence would be thwarted.
2. Since the legal representatives of the deceased have already been paid ex-gratia payment of Rs. one lac per person, and the injured have been sanctioned Rs. 20,000/- each nothing further remains to be done so far as that aspect of the matter is concerned.
3. Mr. Parekh learned Advocate had some doubts as to whether the injured persons were merely sanctioned the amount or were actually paid. That could be ascertained, if Mr. Parekh, so desires, by visiting the jail and meeting the injured. persons. No restraint seems to have been placed on counsel visiting and ascertaining this fact. We see no reason to doubt the statement on behalf of the Government in this behalf but should there be any difficult in that behalf counsel will have liberty to approach this Court.
4. As regards the medical treatment, to be provided to the injured persons, counsel for the State Government states that proper, arrangements for medical treatment have been made and the latest medical report shows that they have considerably improved. We do hope that the State Government will ensure that Whatever medical treatment is, necessary so far as the injured are concerned will be accorded to them and proper protection will also be given to them in jail. This should take care of the apprehension expressed by Mr. Parekh.
5. Nothing further remains to be done. The writ petitions will stand disposed of accordingly.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.