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

1951 Supreme(HP) 18

CHOWDHRY
Ranjha – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
K.C. Pandit for Petitioner, Bakshi Sita Ram for the State.

ORDER :- Ranjha was convicted under Section 302, I. P. C., by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahasu on 21-4-1951 for the murder of one Durga and sentenced to death. On an appeal by him and submission of the proceedings by the Sessions Judge, his appeal was dismissed and the sentence of death was confirmed by this Court on 27-6-1951. Ranjha has now applied from jail for a certificate under Article 134(1)(c), Constitution of India, that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.

2. The application submitted from jail contains no ground but the learned counsel appearing for Ranjha has urged three points in support of the application, namely, (1) that this Court consisting as it does of only one Judge had not the power to confirm the sentence of death, (2) that the trial of the applicant in the sessions Court was prejudiced by Laldin having been produced as a prosecution witness and (3) that there was no proper compliance with the provisions of Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code, in the Sessions Court.

3. The argument put forward in support of the first point is as follows. Under Article 216 of the Constitution, which applies to the High Courts in Part A States, every High Cou









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