Back
DIPAK MISRA, SHANTANU KEMKAR
Shubhkaran – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
Kemkar, J. -- By this appeal, the appellant is assailing the judgment dated 14.10.1991 passed in Sessions Trial No. 44/88, by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Sidhi, whereby he has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/-. The trial Court has, however, acquitted the co-accused persons, namely, Chotelal, Pannalal and Chitanand.
According to the prosecution, on 19:1.1988, at about 1.30 p.m. one Bhagwat Prasad while going towards village Panikabandha alongwith Vijay Singh (PW 2), Gopal and Rama heard the sound of cutting of a tree from forest near village Titaria. Bhagwat Prasad was a forest Guard. When he went to the place from where the sound was coming, he saw appellant Shubhkaran and Chitanand cutting a tree by their axes. Bhagwat Prasad asked then not to cut the tree and insisted for handing over their axes to him. Both of them after initial protest handed over their axes to Bhagwat Prasad. Vijay Singh (PW 2) held the axe of Shubhkaran. Thereafter, all' of them left the place and as they reached village Titaria, Shubhkaran suddenly snatched the axe from Vijay Singh (PW 2)
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.
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
