Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
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
Past Licenses and Undertaking Prove Knowledge of Copyright License Need, Warrant Ad-Interim Injunction: Bombay HC
13 Mar 2026
Non-Compliance on Counter Affidavits Draws Exemplary Costs Warning: Supreme Court in Gauri Maulekhi PIL
13 Mar 2026
SLPs Challenging PoP Idol Immersion Orders Disposed as Infructuous; Liberty to Assist Bombay HC: Supreme Court
13 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Manish Kori – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
K.J. Thaker, J.
1. Both these appeals arise out of common judgment and order dated 25.2.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Jalaun, in Sessions Trial No.280 of 2009 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellants, Babloo Kori alias Santosh Kumar and Manish Kori for commission of offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.20,000/-and in case of default in payment of fine, further to undergo one year simple imprisonment.
2. The matter was kept for pronouncement of judgment on 14.9.2022, but due to paucity of time, the judgment could not be pronounced on the said date.
3. Heard Sri Raj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the accused-appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
4. Brief facts as culled out from the
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 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 principles to distinguish between 'murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under IPC, and the consideration ....
The court established that the distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on the intent and premeditation of the accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and the application of the reformative theory of punishment in senten....
The distinction between 'murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under Section 299 and 300 of IPC, and the application of the reformative theory of punishment in sentencing.
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