Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas - The term Samvidhaan Hatya (Constitution Murder) is used to criticize the declaration of June 25th as Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas, asserting it insults the Constitution of India. The notification claims that the people of India have faith in the Constitution, and declaring this day as Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas is seen as violative of constitutional principles. The petition challenges this declaration, emphasizing that the proclamation of Emergency was under constitutional provisions, and thus, the observance of this day as Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas is unconstitutional. ["SAMIR MALIK Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. - Delhi"]
Legal Recognition of Freedom Fighters and Pension Schemes - Several sources discuss the eligibility and disbursement of pensions and benefits to freedom fighters and their dependents under schemes like the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980, and Swatantrata Sangram Samman Nidhi. The courts have clarified that participation in the freedom movement alone does not guarantee pension eligibility; proper certificates and adherence to scheme criteria are necessary. Rejections of claims often hinge on procedural grounds, such as the absence of required documentation or the timing of application rejection (e.g., orders passed on 8-12-2000). In some cases, courts have directed authorities to process payments from the date of rejection or sanction order. ["MD HAIDAR Vs The State - Patna"], ["Rajesh Sharma vs Union Of India - Madhya Pradesh"], ["Murti Devi @ Jay Murity Devi vs The State Of Bihar and Ors - Patna"], ["State Of Madhya Pradesh VS Ghanshyam Sharma - Madhya Pradesh"], ["Harishankar Nagar vs Balwansingh Jadon - Madhya Pradesh"], ["The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Ghanshyam Sharma (Died) Through Legal Representative Smt. Ramkumari - Madhya Pradesh"]
Ex-Gratia Benefits and Schemes - The 'Agrani Samman' Ex-gratia Benefit Scheme, initiated from January 1, 2003, provides non-entitlement-based financial assistance to eligible employees, with detailed guidelines issued for its implementation. The scheme is purely ex-gratia, emphasizing that benefits are not rights but discretionary aid based on service and eligibility criteria. ["A. Mohendra Singh VS Chiarman, Board Of Trustee Prbc Trust - Gauhati"]
Application and Verification Challenges - Several cases highlight issues related to verification of claims, missing documents, or procedural delays affecting pension and benefit disbursements. Courts have often intervened to direct authorities to process claims from specific dates, such as the date of rejection or sanction, ensuring timely payments to eligible beneficiaries. ["Jai Prakash Singh vs The State Of Bihar and Ors - Patna"]
Analysis and Conclusion:The primary insight from these sources is the emphasis on constitutional respect and procedural correctness in recognizing national days and providing benefits to freedom fighters and their dependents. The declaration of Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas is contested on constitutional grounds, reflecting sensitivities around national honor. Simultaneously, the pension and benefit schemes underscore the importance of strict adherence to eligibility criteria and procedural formalities, with courts frequently stepping in to ensure rightful claims are honored from the correct dates. Overall, the discourse balances constitutional respect with procedural diligence in welfare schemes related to freedom fighters.
Pertanyaan biasa yang sering dicari: Apa itu Kanun Keseksaan? Jika anda menghadapi ugutan, paksaan, atau isu hak individu, memahami Kanun Keseksaan (Penal Code) Malaysia adalah penting. Kanun Keseksaan, yang dilaksanakan pada 1871 dan dimodelkan daripada Indian Penal Code 1860, adalah undang-undang utama yang mengawal kesalahan pidana di Malaysia. Ia meliputi pelbagai jenayah seperti ugutan, pembunuhan, dan pemerasan, dengan peruntukan seperti Seksyen 503 (ugutan jenayah) dan Seksyen 506 (hukuman untuk ugutan).
Dalam artikel ini, kami meneroka definisi, peruntukan utama, contoh kes, dan langkah-langkah perlindungan. Nota penting: Maklumat ini adalah umum sahaja dan bukan nasihat undang-undang. Rujuk peguam untuk kes spesifik anda.
Kanun Keseksaan menentukan apa yang dianggap sebagai jenayah dan hukuman yang sesuai. Ia melindungi individu daripada ugutan yang boleh menimbulkan ketakutan kecederaan atau kematian. Contohnya, ugutan berkaitan 'saman suraksha hatya ki dhamki' (ugutan pembunuhan di bawah perlindungan kehormatan) boleh dianggap sebagai kesalahan di bawah undang-undang ini, serupa dengan prinsip di India di mana keselamatan individu diutamakan. Dokumen undang-undang menonjolkan kes di mana mangsa melaporkan ugutan untuk menghalang pendedahan kepada pihak berkuasa Luxmikant VS State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) - DelhiKishan vs State - Delhi.
Ugutan menjadi kesalahan pidana jika ia menimbulkan ketakutan kecederaan atau kerosakan. Di bawah Seksyen 503 Kanun Keseksaan (serupa IPC S.503), ugutan untuk memaksa seseorang melakukan atau tidak melakukan sesuatu adalah boleh dipertanggungjawabkan.
Contoh daripada kes: Unhone mere pati ko jaan se marne ki dhamki bhi di. (Mereka mengugut bunuh suami saya.) Ram Niwas VS State - 2014 Supreme(Del) 1969. Dalam kes ini, mangsa (prosecutrix) melaporkan ugutan apabila suami tiada rumah, menunjukkan corak paksaan.
Seksyen 506 menyediakan hukuman penjara sehingga 2 tahun, atau denda, atau kedua-duanya untuk ugutan biasa. Jika ugutan melibatkan kematian atau pemerkosaan, hukuman lebih berat sehingga 7-10 tahun. Kes di India menunjukkan FIR (Laporan Maklumat Pertama) membawa kepada penahanan pelaku Luxmikant VS State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) - DelhiKishan vs State - Delhi.
Daripada sumber lain: Then he (Suhaib) said... Bullu has taken my revolver, and she is threatening me with suicide. Suhaib Ilyasi VS State - 2018 Supreme(Del) 2718. Walaupun ugutan membunuh diri, ia boleh membawa kepada tindakan polis jika menimbulkan ketakutan.
Kanun Keseksaan juga berkait dengan hak dalam skim faedah, seperti dalam konteks Swatantrata Sangram Sainik Samman Nidhi (India), di mana petisyen ditolak kerana tidak memenuhi kriteria sebagai ahli keluarga bergantung pejuang kemerdekaan KESHAV PRASAD CHOURASIYA VS STATE OF M. P. - Madhya Pradesh. Mahkamah menekankan bukti jelas diperlukan.
Dalam kes janda mencari pencen, tiada cadangan mengikat daripada kerajaan negeri menyebabkan penolakan Murti Devi @ Jay Murity Devi Wife of Late Ramchandra Singh VS State Of Bihar - Patna. Prinsip ini serupa di Malaysia: tuntutan hak memerlukan dokumentasi penuh.
Mahkamah secara konsisten menuntut bukti kukuh. Dalam kes pembunuhan, saksi bermotif boleh dipertimbangkan dengan berhati-hati: PW-1 is an interested witness... to oust claim of his deceased wife. MUNNA RAJBHAR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2015 Supreme(All) 1358. Rayuan dibenarkan kerana bukti lemah.
Kes lain: Q. Sakshya hai ki 12.09.82 ko Prem Kumar ke aadesh par aapne Doman ki hatya goli mar kar ki. Ram Jiwan Choudhary Alias Mito Choudhary VS State Of Bihar - 2011 Supreme(Pat) 191. Mahkamah mengesahkan hukuman untuk pelaku utama di bawah S.302/34, tetapi membebaskan yang lain tanpa tindakan jelas.
Dalam kes pemerkosaan dan ugutan: Mahkamah membebaskan kerana keterangan mangsa tidak boleh dipercayai, tiada bukti sokongan, dan kontradiksi material Ram Niwas VS State - 2014 Supreme(Del) 1969. Ratio decidendi: Keterangan mangsa mesti boleh dipercayai dan disokong bukti.
Kes pembunuhan keluarga: The accused replied, 'In tino ki hatya maine ki hair or mai marne ja raha tha'. Satish Kumar Agarwal VS State - 2009 Supreme(Bom) 795. Mahkamah mengesahkan hukuman S.302 kerana bukti situasi dan pengakuan luar mahkamah, walaupun tiada motif jelas.
Mangsa boleh:- Laporkan segera: Dokumen semua insiden dan buat laporan polis untuk FIR.- Dapatkan perintah larangan: Mahkamah boleh mengeluarkan arahan untuk menghalang hubungan.- Cari bantuan undang-undang: Di bawah Kanun Keseksaan dan Akta Domestic Violence.
Daripada kes: Individu berjaya mendapatkan campur tangan polis membawa kepada penahanan Luxmikant VS State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) - DelhiKishan vs State - Delhi.
Gunakan senarai semakan:1. Dokumentasikan ugutan dengan tarikh, masa, dan saksi.2. Buat laporan polis dalam 24 jam.3. Dapatkan nasihat undang-undang percuma daripada Bar Council.4. Elak hubungan dengan pelaku sehingga kes diselesaikan.
Kanun Keseksaan adalah alat kuat untuk melindungi daripada jenayah seperti ugutan dan paksaan. Daripada definisi ugutan di S.503 kepada keperluan bukti dalam kes pembunuhan dan pemerkosaan, undang-undang menekankan keadilan berdasarkan bukti kukuh. Kes seperti Murti Devi @ Jay Murity Devi Wife of Late Ramchandra Singh VS State Of Bihar - Patna, Luxmikant VS State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) - Delhi, dan Satish Kumar Agarwal VS State - 2009 Supreme(Bom) 795 menggambarkan kerumitan, tetapi juga laluan keadilan melalui tindakan segera.
Ambilan utama:- Ugutan boleh menjadi jenayah jika menimbulkan ketakutan.- Selalu dokumentasi dan laporkan.- Fahami kelayakan untuk hak atau faedah.
Jangan ambil risiko – lindungi diri anda secara undang-undang. Hubungi pihak berkuasa atau peguam hari ini.
Rujukan:- KESHAV PRASAD CHOURASIYA VS STATE OF M. P. - Madhya Pradesh- Murti Devi @ Jay Murity Devi Wife of Late Ramchandra Singh VS State Of Bihar - Patna- Luxmikant VS State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) - Delhi- Kishan vs State - Delhi- Suhaib Ilyasi VS State - 2018 Supreme(Del) 2718- MUNNA RAJBHAR VS STATE OF U. P. - 2015 Supreme(All) 1358- Ram Niwas VS State - 2014 Supreme(Del) 1969- Ram Jiwan Choudhary Alias Mito Choudhary VS State Of Bihar - 2011 Supreme(Pat) 191- Satish Kumar Agarwal VS State - 2009 Supreme(Bom) 795
(Kiraan perkataan: ~1050. Maklumat berdasarkan sumber undang-undang umum; nasihat profesional diperlukan.)
#KanunKeseksaan #HukumPidanaMY #UgutJenayah
He states that as per the Act 1971, the Constitution of India is our national honour and the use of the word “hatya” with “samvidhaan” is an insult to the Constitution of India. ... It is in this context that the expression “Samvidhaan Hatya” has been used. In fact, the impugned notification explicitly states that the people of India have abiding faith in the Constitution of India. ... Present public interest litigation has been filed by the petitioner chall....
.- Piar (Hatya O.P.), District- Muzaffarpur. 2. Md. Kadrey Alam S/o Fakir Mohammad R/o Village- Ratwara, P.S.- Piar Hatya, Dist- Muzaffarpur. ... ...
He next submits that petitioner applied for the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension on 30.03.1982. ... Learned counsel for respondent Union of India in reply submits that all persons who took part in freedom movement in some way or the other are not eligible for Samman Pension under the “Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980” (the Scheme). ... Grant of freedom fighter pension by the State Government under their own pension scheme does no....
It is the case of petitioner that his father was a freedom fighter and accordingly, he was getting Swatantrata Sangram Samman Nidhi. After his death, mother of petitioner also started getting Swatantrata Sangram Samman Nidhi being the dependent of freedom fighter. ... However, from 01/04/2015 Swatantrata Sangram Samman Nidhi was stopped. Mother of petitioner expired on 06/09/2018. Therefore, it is the case of petitioner that respondents ....
Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980” (the Scheme). ... He next submits that petitioner applied for the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension on 30.03.1982. ... Grant of freedom fighter pension by the State Government under their own pension scheme does not ipso facto entitle a person for grant of Samman Pension under the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 of the Central Government. The two schemes are separate and disti....
The question of merits of the grant of Samman Nidhi is not in dispute. What is in dispute is only the relevant date. The earlier application filed by the petitioner for grant of Samman Nidhi was rejected by the order of authorities dated 8-12-2000. Thereafter, the same was challenged in W. P. ... On a reading of the judgment it is quite clear that the order of rejection is the date on which the Samman Nidhi is to be paid to the freedom figh....
The question of merits of the grant of Samman Nidhi is not in dispute. What is in dispute is only the relevant date. ... Under these circumstances, the respondents are directed to make the payment of Samman Nidhi to the writ petitioner w.e.f. 08.12.2000. ... It is undisputed that the first order rejecting the Samman Nidhi was passed on 08.12.2000. Therefore, that would become the relevant date. ... No.881 of 2008 which was allowed vide ord....
The question of merits of the grant of Samman Nidhi is not in dispute. What is in dispute is only the relevant date. ... Under these circumstances, the respondents are directed to make the payment of Samman Nidhi to the writ petitioner w.e.f. 08.12.2000. ... It is undisputed that the first order rejecting the Samman Nidhi was passed on 08.12.2000. Therefore, that would become the relevant date. ... No.881 of 2008 which was allowed vide ord....
The benefits under the 'Agrani Samman' Ex-gratia Benefit Scheme were made available w.e.f. 01.01.2003. It was made clear that the payment under 'Agrani Samman' Ex-gratia Benefit Scheme was purely and entirely ex-gratia and not because of any right of entitlement. ... Pursuant to the notification regarding 'Agrani Samman' Ex-gratia Benefit Scheme and subsequent clarifications issued from time to time in that regard, the respondent ONGC autho....
Samman Pension to the petitioner under the J.P. Samman Pension Yojna with effect from 01.06.2009. The payment of arrears must be done within three months from the date of production of a copy of this order and regular pension with other facilities should be given to the petitioner as per the J.P. ... Samman Pension. Application was invited by Press Communication dated 09.10.2015 from eligible persons and accordingly the petitioner submitted....
Then he (Suhaib) said “Call Bullu to America (Bullu ko America bula lo)”. (hum logo ki ladai ho rahi hai aur dekho Bullu ne meri revolver leli hai suicide karne ki dhamki de rahi hai)” Then I got concerned and asked Suhaib to give the phone to Anju. He then said “we have gotten into an argument, and look Bullu has taken my revolver, and she is threatening me with suicide.
His exact statement in this regard is reproduced below- He further states that he went to the police station on the next day i.e. 16.08.2006. "Mujhe Ramdhyan Ki Hatya Ki Jankari 15 Tareekh Ko Hui. Savere Lagbhag 6 Baje Hui. Maine Is Bare Me Shatrughan Ko Bataya Tha. Shatrughan Hamare Yaha Sadhe 6 Baje Aye The."
Unhone mere pati ko jaan se marne ki dhamki bhi di. As per statement of the Prosecutrix recorded before the Court, her version reads as under :- (i) On 24.03.1997 when her husband was away to Karawal Nagar and children in the neighbourhood, both the Accused came at about 3.00 pm and inquired about her husband and children.
Q. Sakshya hai ki 12.09.82 ko Prem Kumar ke aadesh par aapne Doman ki hatya goli mar kar ki.
The accused replied, "In tino ki hatya maine ki hair or mai marne ja raha tha". These depositions in the cross-examination remained intact. After some time Ashok, his other brother, came and asked the accused as to what had happened.
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
