Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SHAMIMA JAHAN
Farhana Begum, W/o. Haji Abdur Rauf – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Rep. By The PP, Assam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common legal questions raised in petitions (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background facts of case and fir details (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. petitioners' arguments regarding video evidence and reputation (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. state’s arguments and witness statements against petitioners (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. court's initial observation on fir and statements (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. legal interpretation of relevant sections and evidence evaluation (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. absence of common intention under ipc section 34 for petitioner no.2 (Para 21 , 22) |
| 8. outcome for petitioner no.2 and petitioner no.1 dismissal (Para 23 , 24) |
| 9. outcome for petitioner aklima begum's involvement (Para 25 , 26) |
| 10. final disposition of both petitions (Para 27) |
JUDGMENT :
Both Criminal Petition No.231/2024 and Criminal Petition No.222/2024 were heard analogously and are taken up together for disposal by this common judgment and order since both these petitions raises common questions of law and arises out of the same set of facts.
2. Heard Mrs. S.B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners in both the petitions and Mr. K. K. Das and Mr. J. Chutia, learned Additional Public Prosecutors, Assam for the
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.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
