Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Section 4 Official Secrets Act Presumption and Prima Facie Evidence Bar Bail in Espionage Case: Punjab & Haryana HC
14 Mar 2026
Centre Revokes Wangchuk's NSA Detention Amid SC Challenge
14 Mar 2026
No Interference Allowed in Religious Prayers on Private Premises: Allahabad HC Cites Maranatha Precedent
14 Mar 2026
No Proof of Absolute Ownership by Mizo Chiefs Bars Fundamental Rights Claim Under Article 31: Supreme Court
14 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
PANKAJ BHANDARI, BHUWAN GOYAL
Ajay Ghos S/o Shri Dhananjay Ghos – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through P. P. – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Bhandari, J.
1. Instant appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. arises out of the judgment dated 25/02/2017 passed by Shri Tirupati Kumar Gupta, R.J.S. (District Judge Cadre), learned Additional Sessions Judge No.12, jaipur Metropolitian in Sessions Case No.124/2012 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC with fine of Rs.1,00,000/-and in default of payment of fine to further undergo additional sentence of two years simple imprisonment.
2. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that on 10.07.2012 the complainant-Narendra Kumar Sharma lodged a written report at Police Station Ramganj, District Jaipur, on the basis of which an FIR bearing No. 265/2012 was registered by the Police under Section 302 IPC and thereafter, the investigation commenced. The police after investigation filed charge-sheet against the appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC and Section 4/25 of Arms Act. The case was triable by the Court of Sessions and therefor
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between culpable homicide and murder, and the application of Section 300 and Section 304 of the IPC in determining the intention of....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide is fundamentally based on the presence or absence of intent, with actions classified under Section 304 Part II when committed without intention to....
Conviction for murder under Section 302 can be amended to culpable homicide under Section 304 based on circumstances, including lack of premeditation and severity of the injury.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the provisions of Section 299, Section 300, and Section 304 Part I of IPC to determine the nature of the offence and the cons....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on the accused's intent; insufficient evidence of intent led to reclassification from murder to culpable homicide.
The court distinguished between murder and culpable homicide, concluding that the appellant's actions fell under Section 304 Part-I due to lack of intent and premeditation.
The distinction between 'murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under Sections 299 and 300 of IPC, and the application of the reformative theory of punishment in determining the appr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the distinction between 'murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under Section 299 and Section 300 of IPC, and t....
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
Listen Article