IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
P.K. JAISWAL, VIRENDER SINGH, JJ.
State of M.P. & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Munna @ Shahnwaj & Ors. - Respondents
CRIMINAL REFERENCE No.01 of 2017, CRIMINAL APPEAL No.696 of 2017, 447, 461, 514, 521, 560, 625 of 2013
Decided On : 15-03-2018
Virender Singh, J.
1. This criminal reference and all the criminal appeals, which we propose to dispose off by this common order, are directed against two separate judgments passed in S.T. No.63/10 (State vs. Juber and others) and S.T. 35/12 (State vs. Munna @ Shahnwaj) arise out of Crime No.436/10 under Sections 396 read with 120-B, 397 read with Section 120-B and 412 of IPC and 25 (1B)(a) and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 of Police Station- Khargone, District–West Nimar.
2. In S.T. No.35/12, vide judgment dated 21/02/2017, learned trial Court (4th ASJ, Khargone) has awarded death penalty to the accused Munna @ Shahnwaj and referred the matter to this Court for confirmation of the same. The trial Court further held the accused Munna @ Shahnwaj guilty for the offences punishable under Sections, and awarded punishment as given below:-
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of Fine
396 r/w 120-B of IPC
Death Sentence
Rs.1,000/-
2 Years R.I.
397 r/w Section 120-B of IPC
10 Years R.I.
Rs.10,000/-
2 Years R.I.
Under Section 412 of IPC
10 Years R.I.
Rs.20,000/-
2 Years R.I.
25 (1) (a) of Arms Act, 1959 (Correct 25(1B)(a)
5 Years R.I.
Rs.5,000/-
6 Months R.I.
27 of Arms Act, 1959
5 Years R.I.
Rs.10,000/-
1 Year R.I.
3. In S.T. No.63/10, vide judgment dated 05/03/2013, the learned trial Court (2nd ASJ, Khargone) has held the accused persons guilty for the offences punishable under Sections, and awarded punishment as given below:-
Accused/appellant-Juber S/o Kale Kha
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
396 r/w 120-B of IPC
Life imprisonment
Rs.25,000/-
2 years RI
397 r/w Section 120-B IPC
7 years RI
NIl
412 of IPC
10 years RI
20,000/-
1 year RI
25(1)(A) of Arms Act (Correct 25(1B)(a)
5 years RI
5,000/-
6 months RI
27 of Arms Act
5 years RI
10,000/-
1 year RI
Accused/appellant-Shafeeq
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
396 r/w 120-B of IPC
Life imprisonment
Rs.25,000/-
2 years RI
397 r/w Section 120-B IPC
7 years RI
NIl
412 of IPC
10 years RI
20,000/-
1 year RI
25(1)(A) of Arms Act (Correct 25(1B)(a)
5 years RI
5,000/-
6 months RI
27 of Arms Act
5 years RI
10,000/-
1 year RI
Accused/appellant-Ramjan S/o Kalu Khan
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
396 r/w 120-B of IPC
Life imprisonment
Rs.25000/-
2 years RI
397 r/w Section 120-B IPC
7 years RI
412 of IPC
10 years RI
20,000/-
1 year RI
216 -A of IPC
5 years RI
10,000/- 1
year RI
Accused/appellant-Mohammad Patel
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
396 r/w 120-B of IPC
Life imprisonment
Rs.25000/-
2 years RI
397 r/w Section 120-B IPC
7 years RI
412 of IPC
10 years RI
20,000/-
1 year RI
216 -A of IPC
5 years
10,000/-
year RI
Accused/appellant-Ramjan S/o Ibrahim
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
396 r/w 120-B of IPC
Life imprisonment
Rs.25000/-
2 years RI
397 r/w Section 120-B IPC
7 years RI
412 of IPC
10 years RI
20,000/-
1 year RI
216 -A of IPC
5 years
10,000/-
year RI
Accused/appellant-Baliram
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
216-A of IPC
5 years RI
10,000/-
1 year RI
412 of IPC
5 years RI
20,000/-
1 year RI
201 of IPC
3 years RI
2000/-
6 months RI
25-1(A) of Arms Act (Correct 25(1B)(a))
5 years RI
5000/-
6 months RI
Accused/appellant-Bablu @ Taslim
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
396 r/w 120-B of IPC
Life imprisonment
Rs.25,000/-
2 years RI
397 r/w Section 120-B IPC
7 years RI
412 of IPC
10 years RI
20,000/-
1 year RI
Accused/appellant-Abdul Aziz
Offence u/S.
Imprisonment
Fine
In default of fine
216-A of IPC
5 years RI
Allauddin Mian and Ors. v. State of Bihar
Anwar P V. vs. P.K. Basheer and Other
Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Chonampara Cheliappan vs. State of Kerala
Iqbal and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Jaspal Singh @ Pali and Others vs. State of Punjab
Kanan and Others vs. State of Kerala
Machhi Singh and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan
P.C. Purshothama Reddiar v. S. Perumal
Rafiq Ahmed @ Rafi v. State of U.P.
Rajesh Govind vs. State of Maharashtra
Rajkumar @ Raju Vs. State of Uttranchal
Raju @ Rajendra Vs. State of Maharashtra
Ramnaresh and Ors v. State of Chhattisgarh
Ronny alias Ronald James Alwaris Etc. v. State of Maharashtra
Shyam Behari v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Siddanki Ram Reddy vs. State of Anadhra Pradesh
Soni vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Sonu alias Amar v. State of Haryana
State of Maharashtra v. Goraksha Ambaji Adsul
State of Maharashtra vs. Syed Umar Syed Abbas and Others
Subhash and Shiv Khankar vs. State of U.P.
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.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.