Case analysis of lallan rai v

I have prepared my judgment, which is going to cost me the Chief Justice-ship of India. Third is, the sanction even in respect of offences mentioned therein is without application of mind of the sanctioning authority.

After hearing both the prosecution and the accused charges were framed against different accused for different offences under TADA and also under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Now that we have set aside the conviction of those accused of the offence under Section 3 5 of TADA we think that the sentence of imprisonment awarded to A-1 to A-4 for the offence under Section 5 of TADA must be enhanced.

After it was defused the same was taken into custody. The factual position is also to be mentioned now. There is nothing in the sub-section to indicate that prior Case analysis of lallan rai v of the District Superintendent of Police should be in writing. The sub-section reads like this: So oral approval by itself is not illegal and would not vitiate the further proceedings.

PW-1 Prithvi Singh has said in evidence that the police party had, in fact, tried to get one or two persons who came by that way to remain as witnesses for the action they were about to take but none of them obliged. When Parliament enacted the present Code they advisedly incorporated the words "any error or irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution" in Section of the present Code as they wanted to prevent failure of prosecution on the mere ground of any error or irregularity in the sanction for prosecutions.

From the said 7 judgments it appears that 8 witnesses were examined by Case analysis of lallan rai v prosecution. He who does a terrorist act falling within the aforesaid meaning is liable to be punished under Sub-section 2 of Section 3. A specific defense was taken by A-2 in Criminal Appeal No.

We heard arguments of different senior counsel for different appellants at length. A6 was convicted under Section 3 5 of the TADA and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rupees five lacs. The sustainability of the conviction thereunder is assailed before us from different angles.

Before we take up the individual case against each one of them we may refer to the contentions severally made by the learned counsel on a point of law as against the conviction under Section 3 4. The key words are these: But the crucial words in this section are "in furtherance of the common intention of all" which originally were not there when the section was enacted in the Code 13 of If the evidence of the police officer is found acceptable it would be an erroneous proposition that court must reject the prosecution version solely on the ground that no independent witness was examined.

Please relieve me from this agony and pain. But there are some other acts closely linked with the above but not included in sub-section 1such as entering into a conspiracy to do the above acts or to abet, advise, incite or facilitate the commission of such acts.

Under Article 20 1 of the Constitution "no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence".

State of Maharashtra wherein want of independent witnesses of the locality rendered suspicious a raid conducted by the police. But a closer scrutiny of the evidence dissuaded us from attaching any such significance to the said circumstance.

Before we take up the individual case against each one of them we may refer to the contentions severally made by the learned Counsel on a point of law as against the conviction under Section 3 4. Second is, the sanctioning authority did not intend prosecution proceedings to be launched against the appellants for any offence other than those specifically mentioned in the sanction order.

The second squad caught hold of A-2 Bhai Thakur and seized one 0. Second is, to claw down to the tentacles of the provision it is not enough that the accused concerned is a terrorist by himself, but he should have membership in a terrorists gang which is involved in terrorist acts.

Section of the Code is not intended to be used as an interrogation. It has been proved that in respect of those bills money has been drawn twice on the basis of fictitious names, thus, there has been cheating and misappropriation of Government funds. It has only a corroborative value, vide Kashmira Singh v.V.N.

Rai is said to be an accused in JJ shoot out case. The finding of the Designated Court is that A-8 had harboured A-1 Subhash Singh Thakur and A-9 has harboured V.N.

Rai during certain period in R v Oakes () Legal Issue R. v Oakes led to the creation of the Oakes Test Case citation: R v Oakes () 1 SCR Facts of the case: Dissent(verdict): Ontario court of appeal: Section 8 of the Narcotic Control Act- did not correspond with s.

1 of reasonable limits clause. By: Maryann Dodi and Vanessa Kotiadis. SC Judgments Index. For Later. save. Related. Info.

Lalli v. Lalli, 439 U.S. 259 (1978)

Embed. Share. Kuldip Singh v Subhash Chander Jain & Ors Mahadeo Savlaram Shelke & Ors v Pune Municipal Corp & Anr Manohar Lal Chopra v Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund v Kartick Das Rajnibai alias Mannubai v Kamla Devi & Ors Order 39 Rule 2A Lallan Chaudhary 4/4(13).

Lalli v. Lalli

Balwant Rai Saluja v. Air India Ltd., () 9 SCC Labour Law Employer-employee relationship Determination of existence of - Test of complete administrative control i.e.

Hans Raj Khanna

complete, effective and absolute control and. case analysis of lallan rai v.

state of bihar Research Paper CRIMINAL LAW-I CASE ANALYSIS DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW () CRIMINAL LAW-I FINAL DRAFT OF CASE STUDY ON LALLAN RAI v.

Full text of the Supreme Court Judgment: Y. Venkaiah Vs. State of A.P. | Judgments dated january, If the test of proof which was laid down in Lallan Rai (supra), following the principles in Suresh (Supra), is applied to the incriminating facts and circumstances noted and discussed in this case concurrently by the trial Court and the.

Download
Case analysis of lallan rai v
Rated 0/5 based on 35 review