#Section 304 Part 1 IPC | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

almostmagnificentsublime · 4 years ago

Text

Delhi Court orders removal of Indian charged of slaughtering person on foot in Australia

A Delhi Court has suggested the removal of an Indian, charged of slaughtering a person on foot and harming another at South Bank within the State of Victoria, Australia in 2008.

Additional Chief Metropolitan Officer Akash Jain on Eminent 12 famous that in arrange to discover extractability of offences in address, the foremost imperative prerequisite is that the conduct of Puneet (FC) must constitute an illegal/criminal act beneath the law of both the Requesting State as well as the Asked State. This is often known as ‘Double Criminality Rule’. While there's no challenge to the reality that the conduct of FC may be a criminal offense in both Australia as well as India, the as it were dispute raised on sake of FC is terminology of offenses in India vis-à-vis offenses qua which FC is charged in Australia. Let us help you to find the best Lawyer in Vadodara for you.

Totality of acts charged against the FC are to be taken into thought and it does not matter on the off chance that the constituent components of the offenses between the two States contrast. In this manner, the contention of Ld. Advise for FC that UOI has not named the offenses of At fault Driving (in Australia) with the same phrasing by keeping it beneath the category of At fault Crime, is without any result, watched the Court.

Area 318 of Violations Act, 1958 gives for the passing of a individual in a vehicular mishap due to carelessness /carelessness /beneath the impact of alcohol /beneath the impact of drugs and assist its sub-section (4) and (5) makes the offense of murder as an special case to this offense. The discipline endorsed beneath this segment is detainment for a period up to 20 a long time or fine or both. Beneath Indian Law, Segment 279 IPC r/w Segment 304-A IPC commonly bargains with the passing of a individual caused by a engine vehicle driven in a hasty or careless way. Whereas Segment 304 Part-II of IPC bargains with the passing of a individual caused with the information of the wrongdoer that he is likely by such act would cause passing.

The Court held that Area 21(2) of the Outside Travel permits (Law Authorization and Security) Act 2005, Commonwealth is concerned, which is culpable for detainment for a period upto 10 a long time, Segment 12(1)(d) of International ids Act, 1967 is prima-facie an proportionate offense which is culpable with detainment for a term which may expand to two a long time or with fine which may expand to Rs. 5,000/- or with both. This offense too satisfies the rule of double culpability and consequently, is an extraditable offense.

The Court alluded the case of Puneet vs Union of India, W.P.(CRL) 1633/2017 and CRL. M.A. 9059/2017 in which the Delhi Tall Court had held that the settlement course of action with Australia, which was of the year 1971, was as it were being supplanted by removal arrangement vide notice dated 07.03.2011. In this manner, the notice of year 2011 does not influence the pertinence of Removal Act upon the Asking State. Indeed something else, it has as of now been watched over that Area 304 Part-II of IPC is appropriate on the truths of the display case as contradicted to Area 304-A of IPC, which was properly said within the list of removal offenses within the Moment Plan within the pre-amended Removal Act, 1962.

Thereafter, two requests for urgent provisional arrest of FC were received from the Requesting State. A formal request for extradition of FC dated 03.02.2010 along with supporting documents in six parts were received from the Requesting State. On receipt of an order of the Ministry of External Affairs, Govt. of India dated 08.06.2010, made under Section 5 of the Act, Predecessor Court, issued a warrant of arrest against FC under Section 6 of the Act. Despite issuance of repeated warrants against FC at his Panchkula, Haryana address, the FC could not be apprehended. As per a report dated 13.02.2011, father of FC gave an affidavit that FC was no longer residing in India and had left for Australia. As such, the inquiry proceedings were adjourned sine-die on 04.10.2012 till FC got traced. On 05.12.2013 an application was moved by Union of India before this Court for issuance of production warrants against FC as it was reported that a communication was sent by Punjab police, Patiala that FC had been arrested on 29.11.2013 and was sent to judicial custody. Looking for the best legal advisor in Vadodara Contact – D Parikh & Associates.

Consequently, production warrants were issued against the FC by Ld. Predecessor Court vide order dated 05.12.2013 and FC was produced from Central Jail, Patiala, Punjab before Magisterial Court in Delhi.

Counsel for FC argued that a bare reading of Section 318 of Crimes Act, 1958 makes it absolutely clear that the death of a person in a vehicular accident due to recklessness/negligence/under the influence of liquor/under the influence of drugs is considered as Culpable Driving and that sub-section (4) and (5) of Section 318 of Crimes Act, creates offence of Homicide as an exception to the offence of Culpable Driving. Free legal advice in Vadodara - D Parikh & Associates

It is further argued by the Counsel for FC that in Indian Law as well, death caused by rash or negligent Act not amounting to culpable homicide is covered under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), while offence of culpable homicide is defined under Section 299 of IPC and punishable under Section 304 of IPC. Thus, it is argued that the offence of Section 318 of Crimes Act is at par with provision of Section 304-A of IPC which is only punishable upto 2 years of imprisonment. Moreover, the other offences charged against FC i.e. Section 24 of Crimes Act and Section 21(2) of the Foreign Passports Act (Law Enforcement and Security) Act 2005 are pari materia with Section 279 r/w Section 338 of IPC and Section 12 (1) (d) of Passports Acts under Indian Law, both of which offences do not carry imprisonment more than 2 years. For the best legal advice services visit the best law firm in Vadodara today!

It is further contended by Counsel for FC that under Extradition Act, 1988 of Australia, extradition offence is defined as an offence for which the maximum penalty is death or imprisonment, or other deprivation of liberty for a period not less than 12 months. Thus, even as per the law of Extradition of Requesting State, extradition is permissible only with respect to offences for which penalty is for a period not less than 12 months. Since, the offences made out against the FC under Indian Law i.e. Section 279/338/304-A IPC and Section 12(1)(d) of Passports Act do not carry any mandatory minimum sentence of one year and are punishable for any period of imprisonment upto 2 years, thus, the offences in question do not fall under the category of ‘Extradition offence’.

#australia #legal service #legal advice #lawyer #bestlawyer #dpassociates

1 note · View note

wiseedition · 2 years ago

Text

Morbi bridge crash: Oreva Group offers to pay Rs 5 crore compensation to victims

The assurance on 'interim' compensation was given in the HC by Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd (Oreva Group) during hearing of a suo motu (on its own) PIL admitted last year following the tragedy.

AHMEDABAD: Clock manufacturing firm Oreva Group on Tuesday made an offer before the Gujarat High Court to pay an 'interim' compensation totalling Rs 5 crore to the kin of those who lost their lives and people left injured when a British-era suspension bridge maintained and operated by the firm collapsed in Morbi town in October last year.

However, the court said the compensation offered by the company was not "just".

The suspension bridge on the Machchhu river in Morbi town collapsed on October 30 last year, killing 135 persons and injuring 56 others.

The assurance on 'interim' compensation was given in the HC by Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd (Oreva Group) during hearing of a suo motu (on its own) PIL admitted last year following the tragedy.

Senior advocate Nirupam Nanavaty, appearing for Oreva Group, told the court if the compensation is broadly divided among the affected persons, the kin of the deceased should get nearly Rs 3.5 lakh while the injured will get Rs 1 lakh each, which according to the HC, was not "just".

"Is it just? You volunteered to pay a just compensation.

Is it just according to you? This is not near to just compensation," noted a division bench of Chief Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Sandeep Bhatt.

The bench posted the further hearing on Wednesday and asked Nanavaty to take instructions from his client on whether the company would pay more compensation in the future because this payout has been termed as "not final".

The bench had earlier made it clear that Oreva's offer of compensation "will not absolve it of any liability".

Oreva Group, led by its MD Jaysukh Patel, was responsible for the operation and maintenance of the bridge with a special investigation team (SIT) formed by the state government citing several lapses on the part of the firm.

Nanavaty informed the court that the amount of Rs 5 crore is "ad-hoc" and "interim".

He said Oreva Group "will deposit Rs 5 crore to the Gujarat government within two weeks and state can determine what amount is to be paid to the injured or to the kin of the deceased" Moreover, the corporate entity has taken full responsibility for seven children who have lost both their parents in the tragedy, said Nanavaty.

These seven children will get all the required facilities such as residence and education, till they become majors.

The company would also give them jobs as per their qualifications, said the senior advocate.

Advocate General Kamal Trivedi informed the court that the state as well as the Centre have so far paid a compensation of Rs 10 lakh each to the kin of the deceased and Rs 2 lakh to each injured person.

The Morbi police have arrested ten accused, including Oreva Group MD Jaysukh Patel, under IPC sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), 336 (act which endangers human life), 337 (causing hurt to any person by doing any rash or negligent act) and under 338 (causing grievous hurt by doing rash or negligent act).

#Morbi bridge #crash

0 notes

siva3155 · 6 years ago

Text

300+ TOP FORENSIC MEDICINE Objective Questions and Answers

FORENSIC MEDICINE Multiple Choice Questions :-

1.Law does not consider the following doctrine in a charge of criminal negligence a) Vicarious liability b) Contributory negligence c) Resipsa loquitur d) Novus actus interveniens Ans:b 2.The following may be the examples of privileged communication except: a) An impotent person marrying b) A syphilitic taking bath in a public pool c) Engine driver found to be color blind d) Pilot having hypermetropia Ans:a 3.Which of the following sections of IPC are concerned with dowry death? a) 300 b)302 c)304 d)304-A e)304-B Ans:e 4.A civil wrong is known as: a) Mutatis mutandis b) Pari passu c) Tort d) Ultra wires Ans:c 5.A person is declared dead if he is not found for a) 2 years b) 7 years c) 15 years d) 30 years Ans:b 6.Professional death sentence is a) Imprisonment for whole life b) Rigorous imprisonment c) Erasing the name from the panel of RMPs d) None Ans:c 7.Normal courtesy of one doctor towards another is according to a) Medical etiquette b) Medical ethics c) Both d) None Ans:c 8.Patient of head injury, has no relatives, requires urgent cranial decompression Doctor should a) Operate without formal consent b) Take police consent c) Wait for relatives d) Take Ans:a 9.A doctor should not take fees for issuing certificate a) To a govt.employee b) Death certificate c) Poor patient d) Psychiatric patient Ans:b 10.McNaughten's rule: a) Section 84 b) Section 85 c) Section 86 d)Section87 Ans:a

FORENSIC MEDICINE MCQs 11.Disciplinary control over registered medical practitioners is under: a) Sate medical council b) Indian medical council c) Director of Medical and Health services d) Health secretary of state Government Ans:a 12. WTio can commute a death sentence: a)High court b) Supreme court c) President d) Any of the above Ans:d 13.Death sentence can be awarded by a)First class magistrate b) Second class magistrate c) Sessions court d) Chief judicial magistrate Ans:c 14. India, inquest is carried out by all except a)lice b) Coroner c) Doctor d) Magistrate Ans:c 15.Criminal responsibility in Indian constitution is included in IPC section: a)84 b)300 c)302 d)304 Ans:a 16.A boy attempts suicide, brought to PRIVATE doctor and he is successfully cured. Doctor should a) Inform police b) Not required to inform c) Report to magistrate d) Call up girl friend and ask her to make up Ans:b 17.Who can be considered as an expert witness: a) Medical men b) Firearm expert c) Chemical examiner d)All Ans:d 18.The power of Amnesty for capital punishment is vested with a) The president b) Supreme court c) High Court d) The Governor Ans:a 19.A cognizable offence signifies: a) Imprisonment upto 2 yrs b) Imprisonment upto 3 yrs + Rs. 1000 fine c) Arrest without warrant d) Only fine upto Rs. 1000 Ans:c 20.Conduct money is paid to expert witness with summons from: a) Civil Court b)Criminal Court c) High Court d) Sub Magistrate Ans:a 21.Leading questions are permitted only in a) Examination in chief b) Cross examination c) Dying declaration d) Re- examination Ans:b 22.For exhumation the order should be passed by a) Chief judicial magistrate b) Executive magistrate c) Police officer d) Sessions judge Ans:a 23.Which of the following is true about Oath? a) Not Compulsory , b) Compulsory and binds witness for evidence given c)Holds witness responsible for consequences of evidence d)Witness is liable for prosecution if he does not take oath Ans:b 24.In case of death in lock up, the inquest is held by: a) A police officer b) A Magistrate c) A panchayat officer d) District Attorney Ans:b 25.Death of a patient due to an unintentional act by doctor, staff or hospital is a) Therapeutic misadventure b) Vicarious liability c) Therapeutic privilege d) Diminished liability Ans:a 26.Medico legal autopsy required the permission of a) Relatives b) Medical Superintendent c) Police d) Magistrate Ans:c 27.An arrested person can request the magistrate for a medical examination of his body by a registered medical practitioner as per the following provision in the code of criminal procedure a) Section 53 b) Section 54 c) Section 56 d) Section 57 Ans:b 28.After post mortem exam body has to be handed over to a) Investigating police officer b) Relatives of victim c) Magistrate d) The civil authorities Ans:a 29.A quack gives a penicillin injection to a patient who dies due to it. Will the quack be relieved for his criminal responsibility by raising a plea of accident? a) Definitely b) Likely to c) Never d) Deserves to be acquitted on the strength of evidence Ans:c 30.The sentence awarded by a court may be enhanced by the: a) Magistrate court b) High court c) Higher court d) None of the above Ans:c 31.Negligence on the part of the father towards the son can be punished undersection a) 319 b)317 c)315 d)318 Ans:b 32.Which carries more weight in a court of law? a) Dying declaration b) Dying deposition c) Both carry the same weight d) Both are not significant Ans:b 33. Dying deposition is more important than dying declaration because it is a) Made to a magistrate b) Oath is taken c) Made in presence of accused d) Cross examination is permitted Ans:d 34.Doctor is a) Expert witness b) Common witness c)Both d) None Ans:c 35.The common type of inquest in India is: a) Coroner's inquest b) Police inquest c) Judicial magistrates inquest d) Medical examiner's inquest Ans:b 36. The inquiry into the circumstances of death is called: a) Homicide enquiry report b) Inquest repot c) Open verdict d) Adjourned verdict Ans:b 37. For dowry death punishment is: a) 3 year imprisonment + Rs. 10,000/- b) 5 year imprisonment + Rs. 15,000/- c) 7 year imprisonment + Rs.20,000/- d) 2 year imprisonment + Rs. 15,000/- Ans:b 38.Criminal responsibility of a person of unsound mind in India is incorporated in the Indian penal code: a) Section 32 b) Section 84 c) Section 85 d) Section 88 Ans:b 39. An order for exhumation can be given by: a) District collector b) Additional district magistrate c) Sub collector d) Any of the above Ans:b 40. Perjury is a) Willful utterance of falsehood b) Grievous injury c) Contributory negligence d) Criminal negligence Ans:a 41. Subpoena is a kind of: a) Decomposed body tissue b) Designation c) Document d) Court tribunal Ans:c 42.Dying declaration can be received by: a) Medical officer b) Lawyer c) Police officer d) All Ans:d 43.Exhumation can be done in India a) After 7 years b) After 2 years c) After 10 years d) At any time Ans:d 44.Repeated advertisement in newspaper by a medical practitioner is an example of a) Infamous conduct b) Ethical negligence c) Criminal negligence d) Privileged Communication Ans:b 45.According to IPC section 320, grievous hurt is a) Permanent privation of one eye b) Permanent privation of one joint c) Emasculation d) All of the above Ans:d 46.Exhumation is usually done in the: a) Early Morning b) Evening d) Any time c) Night Ans:a 47.Section 302 of Indian penal code is for: a) Rape b) Murder c) Grievous hurt d) Attempt to commit suicide Ans:b 48.Coroner's court is present at: a) Bombay b) Delhi c) Madras d) Bangalore e) Chandigarh Ans:a 49.Dying deposition is recorded by: a) Doctor b) Magistrate c) Police officer d) Lawyer Ans:b 50.Summons are served a) With penalty in criminal cases only b) With penalty in civil cases only c) With penalty in all cases d) Without penalty in any type of case Ans:c FORENSIC MEDICINE Objective type Questions with Answers 51. Professional secrecy can be divulged: a) If the doctor feels so b) On demand by a court c) Both d) None Ans:b 52. Medical certificate is: a) Documentary evidence b) Oral evidence c) Hearsay evidence d) Parole Ans:a 53. In case of death in lock up, the inquest is held by: a) A police officer b) A magistrate c) A panchayat officer d) District attorney Ans:b 54. In esse of malpractice punishment is given by a) State medical council b) MCI c)IMA d) High court Ans:a 55.All the following are the conditions of defense available for a doctor against allegation of negligence except a) Medical maloccurrence b) No fee for treatment charged c) Therapeutic misadventure d) Res Judicata e) Error of judgment Ans:b 56. Medico legal autopsy requires the permission of a) Police b) Magistrate c) Relatives d) Medical superintendent Ans:a 57. Grievous hurt is punishable under section a) 320 b)354 c)321 d)402 Ans:a 58. Criminal negligence is punishable under: a) 306 IPC b) 376 IPC c)304-AJPC d)304-BIPC Ans:c 59.Second molar erupts at a) 6 years b) 12 years c) 18 to 22 years d) 25 to 28 years Ans:b 60.Identical twins may not have a) Same DNA finger print b) Same finger print pattern c) Same blood group d) Same HLA system Ans:b 61.What is'DNA'finger printing a)Identification of a person finger printing by using genetic engineering method b)A record of a persons genetic make up c)Identification of persons by genetic analysis d) None of the above Ans:c 62.Skull of a male differs from that of a female by all of the following except a) Capacity greater than 1500 c.c b) Muscular markings over occiput are less marked c) Orbits square d) Frontal eminence small Ans:b 63.Eruption of temporary teeth will be completed by: a) One to one and half years b) Two to two and half years c) Three to four years d) Four to five years Ans:b 64.The age of a 15 year old female is best determined by the radiograph of: a) Lower end of Radius and Ulna b) Upper end of Humerus c) Upper end of radius and ulna d) Xiphisternum Ans:c 65.First finger loop bureau was established in a) London b) Paris c) Calcutta d) Madras Ans:c 66.Closure of coronal sutures starts at the age of: a) 20 years b) 21 years c) 30-35 years d) 50-60 years Ans:c 67.Brachiocephaly is due to fusion of a) Saggital suture b) Coronal suture c) Parietal suture d) Lambdoid suture Ans:b 68.Cephalic index is useful in determining a) Age c) Race d) Stature Ans:c 69.Union of epiphysis at the age of 17 occurs in: a) Head of femur b) Head of humerus c) Lower end of femur d) All the above Ans:b 70. 100% sure differentiation of s is possible by pelvic assessment of all except a) Subpubic angle b) Obturator foramen c) Preauricular sulcus d) Greater sciatic notch Ans:d 71. Foetal parts can be detected by X-ray usually by: a) 8 weeks b) 12 weeks c) 14 weeks d) 16 weeks Ans:d 72. To determine the age of a 16 year old girl which of the following is to be radiographed? a) Wrist b) Knee c) Ankle d) Elbow Ans:d 73.A girl of 10 years will have permanent and temporary teeth: a) 8,12 b)8,16 c) 12,12 d) 16,8 Ans:d 74. Multiplying factor of estimating stature from femur (male) is: a) 3.6-8.8 b) 4.1-4.8 c) 4.9-5.6 d) 5.8-6.2 Ans:a 75.If angle of mandible is obtuse it means that the bone belongs to a) Adult male b) Adult female c) Young female child d) Elderly person Ans:d 76. Best method for identification of a person is by a) Scars b) Blood group c) DNA Analysis d) Finger prints Ans:d 77.Super imposition technique is used in: a) Skull b) Pelvis c) Femur d)Ribs Ans:a 78.Patella completely ossify by the age of: a) 6 years b) 10 years c) 14 years d) 21 years Ans:c 79.Human hair differs from animal hair by that a) Cuticle has scales b) Medulla is thick c) Medulla is broader than cortex d) Pigment is central Ans:a 80.A female pelvis differs from male pelvis by that: a) Obtuse subpubic angle b) Broad greater sciatic foramen c) Broad lesser sciatic foramen d) Prominent muscle markings Ans:d 81.The center of ossification appears in the lower end of femur by a) 36 weeks of intrauterine life b) 34 weeks of intrauterine life c) 32 weeks of intrauterine life d) 30 weeks of intrauterine life Ans:a 82.Female pelvis is differentiated from male pelvis by a) Iliac crest b) Preauricular sulcus well marked c) Preauricular sulcus less differentiated d) Pubic symphysis Ans:b 83.Absent fragmented medulla in hair is seen in all except a) Negroid b) Aryans c) Mongoloids d) Caucasians Ans:a 84.Pre-auricular sulcus is used for: a) Determination of race b) Determination of age c) Determination of s d) None of the above Ans:c 85. Pure Aryans have which type of skull: a) Measticephalic b) Bradycephalic c) Dolicocephalic d) None of the above Ans:c 86.Pearson's formula is used for: a) Cephalic index b) Stature c) Race d) Age Ans:b 87.Best specimen of bone for s determination is a) Femur b) Pelvis c) Skull d) Mandible Ans:b 89.Which of the following is best for establishing identity a) Anthropometry b) Dactylography c) Hair examination d) Blood Ans:b 89. The period of mixed dentition is between the ages of a) 2-5 years b) 6-11 years c) 12-14 years d) 15-17 years Ans:b 90. Multiplying factor for estimating stature from humerus is (males): a) 10-12 b)5-6 c)7-9 d)9-10 Ans:b 91. Estimation of age examination of teeth is by a) Pearson's method b) Gustafson's method c) Galton's method d) Bertillon's method Ans:b 92. Most reliable method of identification of a person is a) Gustafson method b) Galton method c) Anthropometry d) Scars Ans:b 93. A child at the age of 7 years has how many teeth: a) 16 b)20 c)24 d)28 Ans:c 94.The most reliable bones for the purpose of medullary index are the following except: a) Humerus b) Tibia c) Radius d) Sternum Ans:d 95.Ossification centre appearing just hefjpre birth is: a) Lower end of femur b) Lower end of tibia c) Upper end of humerus d) Scaphoid Ans:a 96.To make a positive identification with the help of a partial finger point, the points of similarity should be at least: a) 10 b) 12 c)16 d)20 Ans:c 97.Best method to determine age upto ,14 years is a) Ossification centres b) Dentition c) Anthropometry d)head circumference Ans:b 98.Best method for identification of human is a) Blood grouping b) Dactylography c) Anthropometry d)gustafson'sformula Ans:b 99.Lower end of the femur can help to determine the: a) Age b) Height c) Weight d)stature Ans:a 100. Most common type of finger print is a) Loop b) Arch c) Composite d)whorl Ans:a FORENSIC MEDICINE Questions and Answers pdf Download Read the full article

0 notes

bollywoodpapa · 5 years ago

Text

Indian 2 shooting accident: Kamal Haasan, Rakul Preet Singh and Kajal Aggarwal escapes death

New Post has been published on https://bollywoodpapa.com/265990/indian-2-shooting-accident/

Indian 2 shooting accident: Kamal Haasan, Rakul Preet Singh and Kajal Aggarwal escapes death

Bollywood actor Kamal Haasan who is currently shooting for Indian 2 has recently had a narrow escape from the freak accident on Wednesday (February 19) night.

Reportedly, a crane fell on technicians leaving three people (Sri Krishna, Madhu and Chandran) dead and 12 people injured in the accident.

Lyca Productions, who is bankrolling the big-budget project, took to social media to confirm the news and offered their condolences. According to their tweet, Krishna (assistant director), Chandran (art assistant) and Madhu (production assistant) were killed in the accident. Reportedly, Krishna is the son-in-law of popular cartoonist Madhan.

pic.twitter.com/Yqxd0RVx0s

— Lyca Productions (@LycaProductions) February 19, 2020

Indian 2 shooting accident

In his tweet made on Thursday, the actor mentioned how this is the most horrific incidents he has witnessed in his entire film career so far. The actor’s tweet that was made in the Tamil language read, “Today’s accident is the most horrific I have seen in my film career. I have lost three colleagues but my pain pales in comparison to the grief of those who have lost their loved ones. My deepest sympathies to them.” (sic)

Haasan also mentioned that he visited those who are admitted to the hospital and is keeping a constant check on their health. The actor said, “I have met those in the hospital and have also spoken to the doctors and with my strong hope that the injured will recover soon I await the dawn of tomorrow.”

Kamal Haasan also donated Rs 1 crore each to the families of the deceased. “On my behalf, I am donating Rs 1 crore to the family of the deceased and this is what I can do now. This is not the compensation for what we have lost. Some of them are very poor people. Three years back, I was in an accident. I know how difficult it is to recover from an accident like this. Of the three, only one could probably afford,” Haasan said at the press meet.

Actors Rakul Preet Singh and Kajal Aggarwal, who are part of Indian 2, also expressed grief.

Words cannot describe the heartache I feel at the unexpected,untimely loss of my colleagues from lastnight.Krishna,Chandran and Madhu.Sending love,strength and my deepest condolences to your families.May god give strength in this moment of desolation. #Indian2 @LycaProductions

— Kajal Aggarwal (@MsKajalAggarwal) February 20, 2020

Shocked to hear about the accident on the set of my film indian 2.. I don’t even know how to process the loss of lives.. my Heart goes out to families of the deceased .. extremely extremely sad 😔

— Rakul Singh (@Rakulpreet) February 20, 2020

Read also:

Kamal Haasan back home after leg surgery in Chennai, see pics

Meanwhile Nazarethpet police registered a case under IPC sections 304(A) (causing death due to negligence), 337 (causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others), 338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others) and 287 (Negligent conduct with respect to machinery) against Lyca Productions, the crane operator and the crane owner.

#Indian 2 #Kajal Aggarwal #Kamal Haasan #Rakul Preet Singh #News #Rakul Preet

0 notes

marymosley · 6 years ago

Text

Evidence of a Solitary Witness in a Criminal Trial requires Heightened Scrutiny: SC

On expected lines and as anticipated, the Supreme Court has most recently on August 6, 2019 in a latest judgment titled Jagdish and another vs The State Of Haryana in Criminal Appeal No(s). 1864 of 2009 has once again very rightly reiterated like many times in the past that the evidence of a solitary witness in a criminal trial requires heightened scrutiny. It is not that the evidence of solitary witness in a criminal trial is not acceptable. It is certainly acceptable but what the Apex Court has wished to make it amply clear in this noteworthy case like in the past is only that the evidence of a solitary witness must be subjected to heightened scrutiny before accepting it and it cannot be accepted just at face value!

To start with, this notable judgment authored by Justice Navin Sinha for himself and Justice Ashok Bhushan sets the ball rolling by first and foremost pointing out briefly in para 1 that, “The two appellants have been convicted under Sections 302, 149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’). Originally there were 13 accused. Only six were charge-sheeted. Two of them were tried by the juvenile court. Seven were summoned under Section 319. The Trial Court convicted three persons. One of them, Ishwar has been acquitted by the High Court.”

To be sure, para 2 then brings out that, “Sri S.R. Singh, learned senior counsel, on behalf of the appellants submits that once the other accused have been acquitted, the two appellants alone cannot be convicted with the aid of Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court erred in convicting with the aid of Section 34 in absence of a charge framed under that Section. There is no evidence of any common intention, displaying a prior meeting of minds to commit the assault. PW-1 and PW-8 were not eye witnesses. They reached after the occurrence. Their claim to be high witnesses is highly improbable from their own evidence. An alternative submission was made that in any event at best it was a case for conviction under Section 304 Part-II I.P.C. Reliance was placed on Dalip Singh vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1953 SC 364 : 1954 SCR 145, and Sakharam Nangare vs. State of Maharashtra, 2012 (9) SCC 249.”

Quite the contrary, para 3 then reveals that, “Learned counsel for the State submitted that PW-1 and PW-8, the eye-witnesses to the occurrence had stated that Appellant no. 2 made the fatal assault on the head of the deceased with a lathi while appellant no. 1 also assaulted the deceased. The parties resided in the same locality and there is evidence of a street light. Relying on Khem Karan and others vs. State of U.P. and another, 1974 (4) SCC 603, it was submitted that because PW-1 was the sister of the deceased, the credibility of her evidence as an eye-witness to the occurrence cannot be doubted to grant acquittal in the nature of materials available on the records.”

As it turned out, it is then illustrated in para 4 that, “We have considered the submissions on behalf of the parties and perused the materials on record. The parties resided in the same locality and were known to each other. Animosity existed between them because the son of the second appellant had written love letters to the daughter of PW-1. Earlier an altercation had taken place between the parties on 20.05.1995 leading to a police case being lodged against both sides. There was another incident on 12.06.1995 for which the appellants and the deceased were proceeded with under Sections 107, 151 Cr.P.C. The deceased had been released on bail and was returning from the house of PW-1 on 16.06.1995 at about 9.00 P.M. when the assault is stated to have taken place.”

While elaborating further, it is then pointed out in para 5 that, “PW-8 and PW-1 are husband and wife holding arms licence in their individual names. They are stated to have been accompanied to the place of occurrence by Kamla the sister of PW-8 and one Pali Ram who was also an arms licensee. Surprisingly, the latter two have been given up by the prosecution and have not been examined. All four are stated to have moved away from the place of assault out of fear, as claimed. If three of them were possessed of weapons there has to be an explanation why they did not act in self defence when the assault is alleged by lathis, gandasi and guns. It is also difficult to accept that her husband PW-8 and Palli continued to hide in fear while PW-1 accompanied by her sister-in-law alone shortly returned to the place of occurrence to check on the deceased. An additional fact which is not only improbable but highly unnatural according to normal societal rural customs and mores is that PW-1 accompanied by her sister-in-law alone went to the police station at 3.00 A.M. a kilometer away, to lodge the F.I.R. while her husband and Pali Ram who was staying with them remained at home.”

Going forward, it is then brought out in para 6 that, “In the F.I.R. PW-1 made generalized allegations of assault by all the 13 accused who are stated to have surrounded the deceased. But her court statement was more specific with regard to the nature of assault made by each of the accused. A total of 11 injuries were found on the person of the deceased. The first injury was bone deep in the right parieto occipital region with damage to brain and pieces of bone in the wound. There was injury on the neck, lacerated wound over the right wrist joint over the middle of forearm, on the left side of the chest wall, over the iliac crest, over the left scapular region with a linear incision due to sharp weapon, over left deltoid region and lacerated wound over the right knee left ankle and left forearm. The two appellants were armed with lathis by which an incised wound could not have been caused. In any event, the number of injuries on the deceased leaves us satisfied that it was the result of a mob assault and not an assault by the two appellants alone.”

To put things in perspective, it is then acknowledged by the Apex Court in para 7 that, “The High Court has committed an error of record by considering PW-8 to be an eye witness without any discussion when his presence at the time of occurrence has been disbelieved by the Trial Court. With regard to PW-1, the Trial Court has itself observed that her deposition “does not contain the entire truth and it makes the court to sit up and to find out the kernel out of the chaff”. This observation assumes significance in view of the acquittal of the remaining accused by the Trial Court itself, excluding the juveniles.”

More importantly, the Apex Court then poses a question, sounds a note of caution and while further calling for greater scrutiny of solitary witness as rightly pointed out in para 8 wax eloquently to state that, “The question that arises to our mind is that in the mob assault by 13 persons who had surrounded the deceased at night, PW-1 was the sole eye-witness. Even if a light was burning some of them undoubtedly must have had their back to PW-1 making identification improbable if not impossible. The witness has been severely doubted both by the trial court and the High Court to grant acquittal to the other accused. Can the evidence of a solitary doubtful eye witness be sufficient for conviction? We may have a word of caution here. Conviction on basis of a solitary eye witness is undoubtedly sustainable if there is reliable evidence cogent and convincing in nature along with surrounding circumstances. The evidence of a solitary witness will therefore call for heightened scrutiny. But in the nature of materials available against the appellants on the sole testimony of PW-1 which is common to all the accused in so far as assault is concerned, we do not consider it safe to accept her statement as a gospel truth in the facts and circumstances of the present case. If PW-1 could have gone to the police station alone with her sister-in-law at an unearthly hour, there had to be an explanation why it was delayed by six hours. Given the harsh realities of our times we find it virtually impossible that two women folk went to a police station at that hour of the night unaccompanied by any male. These become crucial in the background of the pre-existing enmity between the parties leading to earlier police cases between them also. The possibility of false implication therefore cannot be ruled out completely in the facts of the case.”

Be it noted, it is then observed in para 9 that, “The High Court concluded that the appellants alone were the assailants of the deceased. Ishwar is also stated to have assaulted with a lathi capable of causing lacerated wounds. We find it difficult to hold that the appellants were any differently situated than Ishwar. The susceptibility of eleven injuries, including incised wounds, by two accused is considered highly improbable.”

While citing the relevant case laws, it is then pointed out in para 10 that, “Therefore, in the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, the relationship between PW-1 and the deceased, the existence of a previous animosity, we do not consider it safe and cannot rule out false implication to uphold the conviction of the appellants on the evidence of a doubtful solitary witness, as observed in State of Rajasthan vs. Bhola Singh and Anr., AIR 1994 SC 542, (Cri. Appeal No. 65 of 1980 decided on 25.8.1993):

‘4. From the above-stated facts, it can be seen that the case is rested entirely on the solitary evidence of P.W.1. The High Court has pointed out several infirmities in the evidence of P.W.1. It is well-settled that if the case is rested entirely on the sole evidence of eye-witness, such testimony should be wholly reliable. In this case, occurrence admittedly took place in the darkness….’”

Furthermore, it is then envisaged in para 11 that, “In Lallu Manjhi and another vs. State of Jharkhand, (2003) 2 SCC 401, it was observed that if ten persons were stated to have dealt with blows with their respective weapons on the body of the deceased, and that if each one of them assaulted then there would have been minimum of ten injuries on the person of the deceased. In the present case, as noticed there are 11 injuries on the person of the deceased. Giving the benefit of doubt granting acquittal, it was observed as follows:

’13…..The version of the incident given by the sole eyewitness who is also an interested witness on account of his relationship with the deceased and being inimically disposed against the accused persons is highly exaggerated and not fully corroborated by medical evidence. The version of the incident as given in the Court is substantially in departure from the earlier version as contained and available in the first information report. We cannot, therefore, place reliance on the sole testimony of Mannu (PW9) for the purpose of recording the conviction of all the accused persons.’”

Now let us turn to the concluding paras. Para 12 holds that, “We therefore find the order of the High Court to be unsustainable and accordingly set it aside. The appellants are acquitted. They are directed to be released forthwith if they are not required in any other case.” Lastly, it is then held in para 13 that, “The appeal is allowed.”

In essence, this notable judgment like in the past has fully and firmly endorsed the long held position that conviction can be based on the evidence of a solitary witness but it requires heightened scrutiny. There can be no denying it! It is only after strict scrutiny that evidence should be accepted in such cases!

The post Evidence of a Solitary Witness in a Criminal Trial requires Heightened Scrutiny: SC appeared first on Legal Desire.

Evidence of a Solitary Witness in a Criminal Trial requires Heightened Scrutiny: SC published first on https://immigrationlawyerto.tumblr.com/

0 notes

muralimohan · 6 years ago

Text

Merely because the accused Ramavtar caused the injury on the head by the blunt side of Farsa, the High Court is not justified in altering the conviction to Section 304 Part II of the IPC. As held by this Court in catena of decisions, even in a case of a single blow, but on the vital part of the body, the case may fall under Section 302 of the IPC and the accused can be held guilty for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly that it was a case of free fight, considering the fact that the weapon used by the accused Ramavtar was Farsa and he caused the injury on the vital part of the body i.e. head which proved to be fatal, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the High Court has committed a grave error in altering the conviction of the accused Ramavtar from Sections 302/149 of the IPC to Section 304 Part II of the IPC.

1 NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1411 OF 2013 State of Madhya Pradesh .. Appellant Versus Kalicharan & Ors. .. Respondents J U D G M E N T M. R. Shah, J.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 18.11.2008 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Judicature at Jabalpur, Bench at…

View On WordPress

0 notes

postolo · 7 years ago

Text

2018 SCC Vol. 7 September 7, 2018 Part 4

Arbitration Act, 1940 — Ss. 29 and 13 — Pendente lite interest: An arbitrator has the power to award interest unless specifically barred from awarding it; and the bar must be clear and specific. [Raveechee & Co. v. Union of India, (2018) 7 SCC 664]

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 34 r/w S. 5 — Award — Interference with, when the same causes injustice to either of the parties, contrary to terms of contract — When permissible: The parties are free to decide their own terms and conditions in case of a contract. Once respondent voluntarily agreed that no escalation would be reimbursed even in case of regulation before accepting the contract, respondent could not claim reimbursement of excess of minimum wages on account of hike due to the notification of Government. Further, any departure from the terms and conditions of the contract, unless such condition is arbitrary, would destroy the basic purpose of the contract. [Union of India v. Varindera Constructions Ltd., (2018) 7 SCC 794]

Companies Act, 2013 — S. 59 — RTI Circular No. 1 dt. 9-5-2001: Rectification of register, as opposed to filing of a civil suit to prove title over shares, permissible when fraud is perpetuated on the shareholder in possession of original share certificates by issuance of duplicate shares, without following proper procedure, in favour of impersonator. [Adesh Kaur v. Eicher Motors Ltd., (2018) 7 SCC 709]

Constitution of India — Arts. 26, 32, 35, 38, 49 and 51-A(f) & (g) — Jagannath Temple, Puri — Mismanagement and difficulties by visitors — Directions: Interim directions issued for management and upkeep of Shri Jagannath Temple at Puri. [Mrinalini Padhi v. Union of India, (2018) 7 SCC 785]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 438 — Anticipatory bail — Whether should be for a limited period of time: Due to conflicting opinions of different Benches of Supreme Court, matter referred to larger Bench of Supreme Court for authoritative decision. [Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2018) 7 SCC 731]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Ss. 211 to 213 — Framing of charge — Proper framing of charge — Cardinality and necessity of — Explained: Accused persons are entitled to know with precision what charge they are required to defend. [Vinubhai Ranchhodbhai Patel v. Rajivbhai Dudabhai Patel, (2018) 7 SCC 743]

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Ss. 482 and 245: Rejection of application under S. 482 CrPC for quashment, when discharge application already stood rejected, proper. [Nayan Prasad v. State of Bihar, (2018) 7 SCC 713]

Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 — Ss. 3 and 4 — Accident arising out of and in course of employment: As deceased driver was treated as employee and his death treated on duty and there was consistency in statement of dependants and there were no contradictions, compensation awarded to claimants. [Tebha Bai v. Raj Kumar Keshwani, (2018) 7 SCC 705]

Family and Personal Laws — Hindu Law — Joint Hindu Family/Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)/Coparcenary/Co-owner/Survivorship: Property inherited by a male Hindu from his father, father’s father or father’s father’s father is an ancestral property. Essential feature of ancestral property, according to Mitakshara Law, is that the sons, grandsons, and great grandsons of the person who inherits it, acquire an interest and rights attached to such property at the moment of their birth. Share which a coparcener obtains on partition of ancestral property is ancestral property as regards his male issue. After partition, property in hands of a son continues to be ancestral property and son of that son (whether natural or adopted) takes interest in it and is entitled to it by survivorship. [Shyam Narayan Prasad v. Krishna Prasad, (2018) 7 SCC 646]

Government Contracts and Tenders — Conduct of auction/Evaluation/Acceptance/ Rejection of Bid/Tender/Scope of judicial review: Directions to Evaluation Committee qua valuation and bids and conditions required to be met by bidders for revival of Super Bazar at New Delhi, issued. [Super Bazar Karamchari Dalit Sangh v. Union of India, (2018) 7 SCC 617]

Importance of maintaining sanctity of DNA samples: This article is primarily intended to emphasise upon the importance of maintaining sanctity of forensic samples by timely conducting forensic medical examination (FME) of individuals or relevant spots to maintain sanctity and reliability of samples. [Management of DNA Sampling in Rape Incidents by G.K. Goswami and Siddhartha Goswami, (2018) 7 SCC (J-4)]

Income Tax Act, 1961 — S. 11 [as existing prior to amendment made in S. 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act 2 of 2014]: Regarding grant of depreciation claimed by charitable institutions on capital assets, even when the expenditure on acquisition of the assets had been treated earlier as application of income for charitable purposes, approving the ruling in Institute of Banking, Personnel Selection, 2003 SCC OnLine Bom 642, wherein the Court rejecting the view that S. 32 was the only section granting benefit of deduction on account of depreciation, had inter alia held that the income of the Trust is required to be computed under S. 11 on commercial principles after providing for allowance for normal depreciation and deduction thereof from gross income of the Trust, in the present case, orders of the High Courts granting benefit of depreciation on the assets acquired by the respondents assessees/charitable institutions upheld. Further held, the amendment made in S. 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act 2 of 2014 effective from Assessment Year 2015-16, was prospective in nature. Also, held, that once the assessee is allowed depreciation, he shall be entitled to carry forward the depreciation as well. [CIT v. Rajasthani and Gujarati Charitable Foundation, (2018) 7 SCC 810]

Income Tax Act, 1961 — S. 194-H (w.e.f. 1-6-2001) r/w S. 201 — Tax at source — Deduction of, on payments made by appellants (Prasar Bharati Doordarshan Kendra) to advertising agencies: Payments made by appellants (Prasar Bharati Doordarshan Kendra) to advertising agencies is to be construed as commission to agents not as payments between principal-to- principal. [Prasar Bharati v. CIT, (2018) 7 SCC 800]

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — S. 11-A — Object of — Re-emphasised: Exclusion of time spent in stay has to be considered based on facts of each case. [Raj Kumar Gandhi v. Chandigarh Administration, (2018) 7 SCC 763]

Language of the Law: In this article the author emphasis the need to simplify the language of the law in India. [Whereof They’re Ipso Facto Words: India Needs to Simplify the “Language of the Law” by Jyoti Sagar, (2018) 7 SCC (J-1)]

Limitation Act, 1963 — S. 5 — Sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing appeal — What is: Aggrieved persons not made a party before court against whose order they had appealed, is sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing appeal. [Hetal Chirag Patel v. State of Gujarat, (2018) 7 SCC 703]

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — S. 166 — Fatal accident — Compensation of — Income of deceased: There is nothing in law which requires Tribunal to assess income of deceased only on basis of a salary certificate for arriving at a just and fair compensation to be paid to claimants for loss of life. [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Indiro Devi, (2018) 7 SCC 715]

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Ss. 166 and 165, 2(28), 2(44) and Statement of Objects and Reasons — Compensation claims under the Act — Maintainability: “Use of motor vehicle”, includes non-traffic use. However, causal relationship should exist between the violation and the accident caused. There has to be some act done by the person concerned in causing the accident. The commission or omission must have some nexus with the accident, though the “use” of the motor vehicle concerned need not have an intimate and direct nexus with the accident. [Kalim Khan v. Fimidabee, (2018) 7 SCC 687]

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 302 or S. 304 Pt. II [S. 300 Exception 4]: As ingredients of S. 300 Exception 4 were present, conviction converted from S. 302 to S. 304 Pt. II. [Tularam v. State Of M.P., (2018) 7 SCC 777]

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 306 — Abetment of suicide — Ingredients for invoking of S. 306 — Not made out: As allegations in FIR, relating to mental torture of deceased at the hands of his higher officers, in this case, were completely inadequate not satisfying requirements under S. 306, proceedings initiated against accused quashed. [Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 7 SCC 781]

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302, 498-A and 506: In this case appellant-accused was convicted for murder of his wife. It was held by the Supreme Court that the due to some extenuating circumstances like, after killing his wife, appellant tried to kill himself, etc., portion of impugned order, prescribing life sentence for minimum period of 30 yrs, deleted, making it a case of life imprisonment simpliciter. [Nitin Balkisan Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 7 SCC 685]

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302/149 — Murder trial: In this case due to rivalry between two factions in village led to attack using country-made bombs, hunting sickles and iron pipes and there was death of four persons but all respondent-accused were acquitted by High Court. It was held by the Supreme Court that the High Court erred in eschewing testimonies of witnesses in toto. Minor contradictions and omissions in evidence of witnesses were to be ignored. All eyewitnesses including one who turned hostile consistently spoke about attack on one deceased and his supporters. Witness who gave vivid description of incident was corroborated by other witnesses. However, on oral evidence of witnesses and medical evidence, High Court rightly acquitted some respondents giving them benefit of doubt but acquittal of other respondents by High Court, set aside, convicting them under S. 302 IPC and sentencing them to undergo life imprisonment. [State of A.P. v. Pullagummi Kasi Reddy Krishna Reddy, (2018) 7 SCC 623]

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 84, 302 and 324 — Murder trial — Applicability of S. 84: Reasonable doubt regarding mental condition of accused at the time of incident was created in the mind of court from materials and evidence available. As prosecution failed to lead any evidence in rebuttal and was not able to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, conviction of accused under Ss. 302 and 324 IPC, reversed. [Devidas Loka Rathod v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 7 SCC 718]

Registration Act, 1908 — Ss. 17(1-A) and 49 proviso — Requirement of registration: If document containing contract to transfer right, title or interest in immovable property for consideration is not registered but exhibited, it will bear an endorsement that it is admissible only as evidence of agreement to sell in suit for specific performance under Specific Relief Act and shall not have any effect for purposes of S. 53-A of TP Act. Genuineness, validity and binding nature of document or whether it is hit by any provisions of TP Act or Stamp Act, will have to be adjudicated at appropriate stage after parties adduce oral and documentary evidence. [Ameer Minhaj v. Dierdre Elizabeth (Wright) Issar, (2018) 7 SCC 639]

Service Law — Allowances — Special (duty) allowance — Entitlement to — Special duty allowance to CRPF personnel posted in North-Eastern region — Date of reckoning: Respondents are entitled to special (duty) allowance for period during which they were posted in North-Eastern region not w.e.f. 3-8-2005 when office memorandum was issued by Government to that effect. [CRPF v. Janardan Singh, (2018) 7 SCC 656]

Service Law — Departmental Enquiry — Natural justice — Noncompliance — Inference — When warranted: There is no requirement of appointment of Presenting Officer in each and every case, whether statutory rules enable authorities to make appointment or are silent. When statutory rules are silent with regard to applicability of any facet of principles of natural justice, applicability of principles of natural justice which are not specifically excluded in statutory scheme are not prohibited and can be made applicable in given case to advance cause of justice. Furthermore, Enquiry Officer has to be independent and not representative of disciplinary authority. If he starts acting in any other capacity and proceeds to act in manner as if he is interested in eliciting evidence to punish employee, principle of bias comes into play. [Union of India v. Ram Lakhan Sharma, (2018) 7 SCC 670]

The post 2018 SCC Vol. 7 September 7, 2018 Part 4 appeared first on SCC Blog.

2018 SCC Vol. 7 September 7, 2018 Part 4 published first on https://sanantoniolegal.tumblr.com/

0 notes

aboutphlaw · 7 years ago

Text

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 & S.304 Part-l-Murder-Intention to Kill-Modification of Charge-Accused pre-mediated attack on 'O' and had gone well prepared with lathi alongwith other accused-unfortunately 'D' deceased faced the brunt and became his victim— Accused had no intention to kill the deceased-Accused liable to be convicted u/s 304 Part IIPC and not under S.302 IPC

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 & S.304 Part-l-Murder-Intention to Kill-Modification of Charge-Accused pre-mediated attack on ‘O’ and had gone well prepared with lathi alongwith other accused-unfortunately ‘D’ deceased faced the brunt and became his victim— Accused had no intention to kill the deceased-Accused liable to be convicted u/s 304 Part IIPC and not under S.302 IPC

(2018) 1 LawHerald 87

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

DIVISION BENCH

DALBIR SINGH — Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent

( Before : Mr. T.P.S. Mann and Mr. Mahabir Singh Sindhu, JJ. )

CRA-D-625-DB of 2003 and CAR-S-1451-SB of 2003

Decided on : 11-10-2017

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302, Section 304

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 & S.304 Part-l-Murder-Intention to Kill-Modification of…

View On WordPress

0 notes

sclaw · 7 years ago

Text

Culpable Homicide—Sudden Fight— When and if there is intent and knowledge, then the same would be a case of Section 304 Part I IPC and if it is only a case of knowledge and not the intention to cause murder and bodily injury, then the same would be a case of Section 304 Part II IPC

(2017) 99 ACrC 303 : (2017) 172 AIC 195 : (2017) 2 AICLR 541 : (2017) AIR(SCW) 1150 : (2017) AIR(SC) 1150 : (2017) AllSCR(Crl) 321 : (2017) 1 AndhLD(Criminal) 353 : (2017) 1 BBCJ 282 : (2017) 2 BLJud 42 : (2017) 2 CalCriLR 1 : (2017) 2 CriCC 139 : (2017) CriLR 183 : (2017) 1 Crimes 317 : (2017) 2 ECrC 131 : (2017) 1 GujLH 509 : (2017) 3 JBCJ 116 : (2017) 2 JCC 1271 : (2017) 2 JLJR 38 : (2017) 2…

View On WordPress

0 notes

firstlawindia · 9 years ago

Text

Murder Trial; Gurpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab [Supreme Court of India, 02-12-2016]

Penal Code, 1860 – Ss. 302 & 307 – accused opened fire, which hit the informant on the side of his head – the accused was overpowered by an uncontrollable fit of anger somuch so that he was deprived of his power of self-control and being drawn in a web of action reflexes, fired at the deceased and the injured, who were within his sight. The facts do not commend to conclude that the accused had…

View On WordPress

#Informant #Section 302 IPC #Section 304 Part 1 IPC #Section 307 IPC #Sections 302 and 307 IPC #Supreme Court of India

0 notes

loyallogic · 5 years ago

Text

Culpable Homicide under Indian Penal Code

“This article is written by Yashovardhan Agarwal, currently pursuing B.A.L.L.B.(Hons.) from Hidayatullah National Law University. This is an exhaustive article which talks about what is culpable homicide and discusses in detail about several nuances related to it with the help of related case laws.”

Introduction

Homicide is a term which originates from the Latin term ‘Homo’ means human and ‘caedere’ means killing. The act of homicide is an act that has been a part of human life since day 1. Early men used to kill each other for food or creating dominance, the kings used to perform homicide to win territories and now people kill each other in the sway of jealousy, greed, etc.

Homicide is one of the most grievous act a person can commit as it is the highest order of bodily injury inflicted on a human being hence that’s why regulations regarding Homicide are really grave, for instance, culprits are usually sentenced to life imprisonment or the death penalty as these are the most extreme punishments given by the judiciary.

In India homicide is divided into two forms- Culpable Homicide (Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code) and Culpable Homicide amounting to murder (Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code). Both of these have a very minimal difference but these differences prove to be very crucial for the legal system as the delivery of a fair judgment is dependent on these differences.

In this article, we’ll be discussing the third type of Unlawful Homicide, ‘Culpable Homicide’. What is culpable homicide, what are the ingredients, difference between culpable homicide and murder, punishment regarding it and certain landmark cases to prove our contentions?

Lawful and Unlawful Homicide

A culprit in a case of Homicide cannot always be culpable. This derives the notion of lawful homicide where the accused had a valid reason to commit the crime. In these cases, the person will not tend to be tried by the law and can also be exempted from the charges.

These can include death caused in self-defence or by mistake of fact or there was a bonafide execution of the law etc. Hence Homicide can be lawful as well as unlawful. Lawful Homicide may include justifiable and excusable homicide. Unlawful Homicide may include death by rash and negligent act (Sec 304-A), suicide (Sec 309) or culpable homicide.

Culpable Homicide

As mentioned before culpable homicide is a type of unlawful homicide. Laws regarding culpable homicide are enshrined in the Indian Penal Code 1862 (IPC). According to which, there are two types of culpable homicides-

Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder (Section 299 IPC)

It can be simply referred to as culpable homicide, this comes under the purview of Section 299 of The Indian Penal Code 1862 which states that:

An act done with the intention of causing death or causing such bodily injury which is likely to cause death or having the knowledge that he can likely by his act cause death, he’ll be committing the offense of culpable homicide.

Conditions

After bifurcating the definition, we get 3 conditions which have to be fulfilled to attract Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code these are-

The intention of causing death.

The intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

With the knowledge that he is likely by such an act to cause death.

Illustration

A not knowing that D has a tumour in his brain, hits him hard on the head with a cricket bat, with the intention of causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be caused.

D dies because of the bursting of the tumour.

A is liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Case Law

It was held in the case of Nara Singh Challan v. State of Orissa (1997) that Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code is the genus and Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code is the species. Hence, there are no independent sections regarding culpable homicide not amounting to murder it is the part of Section 300 of IPC which defines Murder.

Herein, the court observed that:

“For deciding the proper punishment which is proportionate to the current offense, IPC has divided culpable homicide into three degrees. First is the gravest form which is Murder it is defined under section 300 of IPC, the second is the culpable homicide of the second degree which is punishable under Section 304 part 1 of IPC and Third is the lowest degree of culpable homicide which is punishable under Section 304 part 2 of IPC.”

Culpable Homicide amounting to Murder

It can be simply referred to as Murder, this comes under the purview of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code 1862 which states that:

Culpable homicide is murder, if the act is done with the intention of causing death or if it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause the death of the person or if the inflicted bodily injury is sufficient enough in the ordinary course of nature to cause death or if there is knowledge involved that the act done is so fatal that in all probability it can cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death and commits such act without any excuse.

Conditions

After bifurcating the definition, we get 4 conditions which have to be fulfilled to attract Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code these are-

The intention of causing death.

The intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused.

With the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

The person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.

Illustration

X knows that Z has a tumour in his brain and he hits him again and again with a bat on his head with the intention of causing death, and

Z dies subsequently.

X is liable for Murder.

Exceptions to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code 1862

Culpable homicide amounts to murder when the act is done with the intention of causing death but in the cases mentioned below this principle doesn’t apply. The following acts can amount to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Exceptions 1-5 in the (d) and (f) illustrations of section 300 of the IPC define conditions when culpable homicide is not amounting to murder, these are as follows-

It is not culpable homicide amounting to murder if it is committed by a person who gets deprived of the power of self-control and causes the death of someone because of a grave and sudden provocation.

It is not culpable homicide amounting to murder when the offender causes the death of someone while exercises his right of private defense of person and property in good faith

It is not culpable homicide amounting to murder if a public servant causes someone’s death while performing his duties and in good faith and he believes that his acts were lawful.

It is not culpable homicide amounting to murder if a person causes the death of someone commits it in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel

It is not culpable homicide amounting to murder when a person suffers death with his own consent when he is above 18 years of age.

Essential Ingredients

Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder

According to the definition provided under Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code, there are majorly 3 essential ingredients to prove that the person is liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. These are-

The intention of causing death.

The intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

With the knowledge that he is likely by such an act to cause death.

Culpable Homicide amounting to Murder

According to the definition provided under Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code, there are majorly 4 essential ingredients to prove that the person is liable for culpable homicide amounting to murder. These are-

The intention of causing death.

The intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused.

With the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

Culpable homicide by causing the death of a person other than the person whose death was intended

The notion of ‘culpable homicide by causing the death of a person other than the person whose death was intended’ is enshrined in Section 301 of the Indian Penal Code which states that:

A person commits culpable homicide when he causes the death of another person while trying to kill the other person. Here the intention of the person who killed or grievously hurt any other person whom he didn’t want to kill or hurt is not considered.

Illustration

Let’s consider, there was Mr A who was angry with Mr B as he took over his business.

He plans to kill Mr B. In order to achieve that he Buys a gun.

He spots Mr B on the street. He takes out his gun and shoots Mr B.

Accidentally the bullet deflects because of a pole and eventually kills Mr C.

Now according to the law, Mr A has committed culpable homicide.

It is also regarded as the principle of transferred intent or transferred knowledge or doctrine of the transfer of malice.

Through the perspective of Sec 299 and Sec 300 IPC

The law didn’t make any distinction between the cases where the person died whether his death was intentional and unintentional. According to Section 299 and Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code, there is nowhere mentioned that the intention to cause injury or death of someone or knowing the consequences of the act is with respect to a particular person only. Hence, a person who has shot someone intentionally but accidentally the bullet changes its direction killing another person, the person who fired the shot is equally liable for the death of the other person as he would have been for the person he intended to shoot.

Case Laws

This is not a new piece of legislation, it dates back to the British era. In the case of R. v Latimer (1886) a person got into a fight and in course of the fight, to beat the man he took out his belt and struck the belt but it rebounded and hit a lady, she was grievously injured. The court held,

The defendant is to be held liable for the injuries inflicted on the woman ignoring the fact that he had no intention to harm her. The mens rea has transferred to the woman from the man he was going to hit with his belt.

This piece of legislation is so confusing that some courts tend to forget that this type of law even exists, it is evident from the case of Rajbir Singh v. State of U.P..

Herein the Supreme Court came thrashing on the Allahabad High Court for not considering Section 301 of the Indian Penal Code in the present case.

In this case, a girl died of a bullet which was fired on another person. The High Court stated in its decision that there was mistake involved and there was no intention of the accused to kill the girl.

The supreme court held that the intention of the accused should be ignored in the present case. The court also held that the Allahabad High Court’s reasoning behind stating the act as an accident is not to be sustained as their reasoning was erroneous. Ultimately he was held liable for his actions.

Punishment

As we know there are two types of culpable homicide according to the Indian Penal Code 1862. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 299 IPC) and culpable homicide amounting to murder (Section 300 IPC). Hence there are two different provisions regarding the punishment for both the offences mentioned in the Indian Penal Code.

Section 304 of IPC

Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code provides punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 299 IPC), it states that whoever causes death with intention or causes such bodily injury as is likely to cause death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be caused because of the act, shall be liable for life imprisonment or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine (Section 304(1) IPC).

Secondly, whoever causes death without the intention of causing death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death or doesn’t have the knowledge that his act could cause death shall be sentenced to imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine(Section 304(2)IPC).

If the act which causes death is done without the intention of causing death but with the knowledge that death is likely to be caused by such act, the person shall be sentenced to imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Case Law

In the case of Shanmugam v. State of T.N., it was held that offences under Section 304 can be considered as cognizable, non-bailable and triable by the Court of Sessions. In this, there arose a quarrel between the accused and the deceased In course of the quarrel the accused stabbed the deceased with a spear in the abdomen and the chest resulting in the death of the victim because of septicemia. The accused was sentenced to life imprisonment under part I of Section 304 of IPC.

If we see in this case that Exception 4 under Section 300 applies here. Hence, it would come under Section 299 of the IPC. Part 1 of Section 304 was attracted because it was clear from the facts that there was a clear intention to cause death or cause such bodily injury which is likely to cause death.

Click Above

Section 302 of IPC

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code provides punishment for murder or culpable homicide amounting to murder (as stated in Section 300 of IPC), it states that whoever commits murder shall be liable for life imprisonment or death penalty and he shall also be liable for a fine too.

Death penalty under Section 302

However, death penalty can only be given in rarest of the rare case this was held in the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab wherein it was observed that when the court can avail the recourse of life imprisonment then why the court has to go for such an inhumane punishment like death penalty. The Indian Judiciary has defined certain conditions in which death penalty could be used as a recourse these were laid down in the Machhi Singh And Others v. State Of Punjab which are as follows:

When the murder committed is extremely brutal, ridiculous, diabolical, revolting, or reprehensible manner which awakens intense and extreme indignation of the community. For instance, setting someone’s house on fire with the intention to burn them alive;

The magnitude of the crime is at a large scale which means causing multiple deaths;

When death is caused because of the caste and creed of the person;

When the motives of the accused were cruelty or total depravity; and

When the murder victim is an innocent child, a helpless woman or person (due to old age or infirmity), a public figure, etc.

But it is still subjective to determine what is rarest of the rare and what is not. Hence it leaves an ambiguity that in what cases can the death penalty be applied and with recent developments in the Mukesh & Anr vs State For Nct Of Delhi & Ors (Nirbhaya case) where all the accused were sentenced to death penalty, made this topic the epicenter of several heated debates across the country, the major question raised is that like other countries why can’t India sort to abolish the death penalty when there is a recourse like life imprisonment present with the judiciary.

Illustrations

Section 299 IPC (Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder)

A, dig a deep pit and cover it with grass and clay, with the intention of causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be caused. B thinking it as a hard ground tries to stand on it and dies. A is liable of Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder.

A paid a truck driver to slam his truck on the car of C, he did it with the intention of causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be caused. C went to the market to buy groceries. The truck crashes with his car, C dies. A is liable of Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder.

A not knowing that D has a tumour in his brain, hits him hard on the head with a cricket bat, with the intention of causing death or with the knowledge that death is likely to be caused. D dies because of the bursting of the tumour. A is liable of Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder.

Section 300 IPC (Culpable Homicide amounting to Murder)

X shoots Z with a shotgun on the point-blank range with intention to cause death, and Z dies subsequently. X is liable of Murder.

X knows that Z has a tumour in his brain and he hits him again and again with a bat on his head with the intention of causing death, and Z dies subsequently. X is liable for Murder.

X starts firing a machine gun in a crowded mall with an intention of causing death, and subsequently killing 10 people. X is liable for Murder

Exceptions of Section 300 IPC

X on coming home finds that his wife is sleeping with A. He causes the death of A by stabbing him with a knife under grave and sudden provocation. X Is not liable under Section 300 of IPC.

X was attacked by thugs who had guns with them, X in private defence kills all the thugs with his licensed gun. X is not liable under Section 300 0f IPC.

X is a Police Officer, one day when he was on duty, he saw some robbers entering a house with weapons, X encounters the robbers and kills them assuming that they would harm the residents of the neighbourhood. X is not liable under Section 300 of IPC.

X and Y had a dirty fight, X in a fit of rage punches Y so hard on the stomach that Y starts bleeding internally and dies. X is not liable under section 300 of IPC.

A who’s an adult instigates B to jump from a ten-story building, B being under 18 and not being able to comprehend what A was up to does the same and Dies, here A is liable for Abetted Murder

Section 302 IPC

A with the intention of killing B shoots at him but the bullet deflects because of bad aim and kills C. A is liable of culpable homicide under article 301 of IPC.

A was driving his car, under the influence of alcohol he was driving at a speed of 150 kmph, he loses control and ramps the car on a footpath killing almost everyone sleeping there. A is liable for culpable homicide under article 301 of IPC.

Major differences between culpable homicide and murder

“All murders are culpable homicide but not all culpable homicides are murders” this is a very common phrase used to establish a difference between culpable homicide and murder. It talks about the point which I’ve already proved before that culpable homicide is the genus and murder is the species. The major difference between them is that murder is a more aggravated form of culpable homicide. In murder there is no presence of ambiguity that the act may or may not kill as it is present in culpable homicide, looking at Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code where there is clearly mentioned that:

“Act done with the intention of causing death or causing such bodily injury which is LIKELY to cause death or having the knowledge that he can LIKELY by his act can cause death, he’ll be committing the offense of culpable homicide”.

If you notice the multiple occurrences of the term “LIKELY” showcases that there is an element of ambiguity that the act of the accused may or may not kill the person, is present. Whereas, in the case of murder which is defined under Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code there is no such mention of words as “likely” which shows that there is no chance of ambiguity left on behalf of the accused, the accused is for sure that his act will defiantly cause death.

As mentioned by Sir James Stephen, it is extremely difficult to distinguish between Culpable Homicide and Murder as the end result of both is death. But there is a presence of difference though little it all boils up to a very subtle distinction of intention and knowledge involved in both the crimes. The actual difference lies in the degree of the act there is a very wide difference of degree of intention and knowledge among both the crimes.

Case Law

Through the case of Reg. v. Govinda, a clear distinction was drawn between culpable homicide and murder. According to the facts of the case, there was a quarrel between a husband and a wife in a fit of anger the husband knocked the wife. The wife became unconscious and the husband in order to wake the wife punched her with closed palms but unfortunately, the wife died because of internal bleeding in her brain. Herein, Melvil, J, held that the man was liable under Section 299 of IPC because clearly there was no intention to cause death and the act was not grave enough to cause death on the spot.

Most Intriguing Judgments Regarding Culpable Homicide

Some land-mark judgments regarding culpable homicide are, as follows:

Bhagwan Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

The decision regarding this case was given recently but the case dates back to 2007. Herein, 5 people were hurt and 2 of them succumbed to their injuries because of celebratory gunfire. The furious bench of the Supreme Court consisting C.J.I S.A. Bobde, BR Gavai and Surya Kant, JJ said:

There is a rise in the incidents because of celebratory firing as they are seen as a status symbol. A licensed gun that is to be used for protection should not be used in celebratory events as it can turn to be very fatal.

According to the evidence collected the accused held the gun towards the roof of the house unfortunately the bullets got deflected and injured. The accused pleaded not guilty as he had no intention to cause anyone’s death. The court noticed that the accused was carrying a loaded gun in public and he did not take proper care of his surroundings. He must’ve had an idea that the pellets could deflect and hurt someone.

The court held him guilty. The offense amounted to culpable homicide under Section 299 of IPC, punishable under Section 304 Part 2 of the IPC.

Ram Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

In this case, the appellant falls so madly in love with his sister-in-law that one day before her marriage he called her in a field and hit her head with an axe. The girl went running towards her house and then went to the police office to file an FIR. After that she was taken to the hospital but she died on the way. The court tried to dwell on the legal nature of the FIR as to whether the same was admissible as evidence of dying declaration.

The court relied on Dharam Pal v. State of U.P. observed that an FIR can be considered as a dying declaration if the victim dies before appearing in front of the court.

The appellant, in this case, was punished by the District Court under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (punishment for murder) but the accused filed a criminal appeal in the High Court against the judgment of the District Court, herein the court, after looking at the post mortem report which showed that if the girl would’ve reached the hospital early she could have been saved, he altered the conviction of the appellant and sentenced him under section 304 part I Indian Penal Code(Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder).

Minister of Justice and Correctional Services v. Estate Stransham-Ford

It’s a South African case wherein a patient suffering from cancer went to the court to seek court permission to let the medical practitioner end his life and end his suffering. He was seeking it as his right enshrined in the Bill of Rights under the South African Constitution and also asked that the medical practitioner should not be charged with culpable homicide, the applicant was allowed by the court to let the medical practitioner go for assisted euthanasia. But unfortunately, he died 2 hours after the judgment. The High Court stated that it is not considered in common use, until and unless the state allows the individual.

Conclusion

In this article, we discussed what is culpable homicide. It means causing the death of someone by an act so fatal which can likely cause death. According to the Indian Penal Code, there are two types of culpable homicide. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder. (Sec 299 IPC), Culpable homicide amounting to murder. (Sec 300 IPC).

We discussed that punishment regarding culpable homicide is mentioned under Section 302 and Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.

Punishment for culpable homicide amounting to murder (Sec 300) is given under Section 302 which is either death penalty or life imprisonment as well as fine. Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Sec 299) is given under Section 304 which is either imprisonment for 10 years or fine or both. It can extend to life imprisonment if there was intention present.

There is one interesting section as well in the act which talks about a person killing another person by mistake while he was trying to kill another person, it is Section 301 of IPC. We learned about some very interesting cases regarding Culpable homicide, through the case of Bhagwan Singh we got to know about regulations regarding celebratory firing, we got to know the international status of validity of euthanasia through the South African Case of Minister Justice.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

The post Culpable Homicide under Indian Penal Code appeared first on iPleaders.

Culpable Homicide under Indian Penal Code published first on https://namechangers.tumblr.com/

0 notes

loyallogic · 6 years ago

Text

Criminal Law-An Insight

This article has been written by M.R Lance Kewin, a student of Symbiosis Law School, Nagpur, Maharashtra.

Abstract

The following article is an overview of the topic “criminal law” where it is explained about the purpose of criminal law, types of criminal law and the features of criminal law and followed by advantages and disadvantages of criminal law. Crime is increasing venomously in and around the world at a fast rate. These bylaws are being passed in order to keep society from crime-free activities committed by criminal offenders. It is due to this reason bylaws under criminal laws are being enacted around the globe to keep a check in the crime rates and make possible efforts to reduce the crime rates in order to leave a healthy society.

Keywords

The following words mentioned below are considered as the most important words used in a paragraph or to deliver an important statement.

1)IPC (Indian penal code)

2)perpetrator (person who carries out a harmful Act)

3)Misdemeanours (a minor doing a wrongful act)

4)felonies (crime committed which is considered as more dangerous than a misdemeanor)

5)criminal offenders (person who is convicted for a commitment of crime)

6)plea bargain (agreement between prosecutor and defendant)

7)punishment (rough treatment)

8)Cr.P.C (code of civil procedure)

9)imposition (tax applied or duty)

Introduction

The following article is based upon an in-depth study of the legal aspect ‘’Criminal Law”. This article is based upon the origin, the workings, the methodologies followed, the purpose and the use /presence of criminal law. In the following article, we would be viewing about the basics of criminal law, the pros and cons of criminal law, its main agenda of the existence in the society, the purpose of criminal law etc. Criminal Law has a crucial and prominent role in society. The law is present to resolve disputes between citizens. It provides a peaceful way to handle situations. Protecting citizens and property. Criminal law protects citizens from criminals who would bring about physical harm to others or in society. Criminal law gives rise to government officials to collect taxes, control pollution, and accomplish other necessary needs.

Context

The criminal law is defined as a body of law which deals with judgements regarding the wrongful act and other offences and is also responsible for charging and giving a trial to the convicted offenders.

The basic function of criminal law is to give justice to the offender and punish the guilty by legal actions.

In today’s Modern world, Crime is being held in many areas around the world. For example, theft, murder, physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, threatening etc. In order to eradicate these wrongful acts by the wrongdoer, criminal law is framed. In India, IPC (Indian Penal Code) is formed. The Indian penal code is the at present criminal code of India. It is a comprehensive method initiated to cover all aspects of criminal law. The Indian penal code was enacted on 9th October 1860. There are various sections placed with separate punishments framed.

For example, Section 405 is known for “Breach of Trust”

Section 304 is known for “Culpable Homicide”

The main thesis for criminal law includes: to eradicate crime, to improve the perpetrator, to provide necessary punishment for the act, and to prevent further crimes. There are two types of criminal laws: misdemeanours and felonies (2).

A misdemeanour is considered as a lower-level criminal offence such as minor assaults, traffic rules violation.

Usually, in many parts of a country, the punishment for these kinds of offences lasts mostly a year or two in the period.

Whereas, A felony is considered as a higher-level criminal offence such as murder, rape, robbery.

Punishments for these types of offences in India are either life imprisonment or the death penalty.

The most important aspect of criminal law is the elements of criminal law.

There are about 7 elements regarding criminal law. They are:

1)Legality–(Accordance with the law)

2)Actus Reus— (Conduct of Crime)

3)Causation— (Action of something)

4)Harm— (Physical or Material damage)

5)Concurrence— (Events of two or more events at the same time)

6)Mens Rea— (Intention of a wrongful act in a part of crime)

7)Punishment–(Imposition of penalty as payback towards an offence).

These constitute the 7 Main Elements of Criminal Law.

Each of the element has its own brief of description. The agenda of criminal law is that the purpose of outlawing conduct is to protect society. Law Makers pass a law with the belief of developing public good. The Act of Criminal Law is to be applied evenly in society. The purpose of punishing criminal offenders includes retribution, behavioural activities and preventing further offences and behavioural activities by the offender.

In India, crime rates increase each and every year. There can’t be a full stop to all the crime rates but with certain disciplinary rules and regulations, we can prevent further criminal activities by eliminating a particular criminal offence. The punishments are meant to reduce the crime rates and it has shown significant changes in society. In Today’s Society, each and every citizen knows the fact of what a good thing is and what a bad thing is but there are some people known as lawbreakers who are well aware of the punishments but yet commit a crime and pay the price for the commitment.

Analysis

The Law Makers have formed Laws which is equally applied to each and every citizen in the society. Particular law is not framed in accordance with a particular person. It is drafted accordingly which is evenly correlative to every citizen. In the United States, all levels of government commit the crime. The federal government, state government and even the local authorities are said to commit some small criminal activity. And the committed crimes come under the respective courts i.e. If a person is implicated with a federal crime, he is answerable under federal court. If a person is implicated under the local unit, the paperwork of the case should be filed in the appropriate court and their own attorney is subjected to be present for the execution of the offence.

The Important point to be noted regarding the local government is that a smaller unit of government cannot invalidate a higher unit’s law. E.g. If a state government makes it illegal to possess drugs, a city government cannot invalidate with that law or they can’t nullify that law.

There are various stages present in a criminal case.

A criminal case begins with the paperwork of filing the arrest warrant. The charges on the offender are based on the decisions of the attorney. But the police are subjected to make an initial arrest. Then the case is subjected to the first semblance in the court. A magistrate reads the case in a formal way. Then the conditions of a bond are set. In some serious cases, the court may order law enforcement to hold up the person without any bond until the final statements of the case.

Hypothesis

Criminal Procedure in the United States

Criminal systems at the federal, state and local levels must follow a series of rules governing the stages of a criminal case, beginning with police investigations and continuing all the way through trial and appeal. The federal procedure is governed by substantive criminal laws found in Title 18 of the U.S. Code and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Every state has its own code of criminal statutes. Necessary rules help to ensure that the government applies the law as possible, and also help safeguard individuals’ rights. These procedures apply in all criminal matters, as well as in some quasi-criminal proceedings, such as removal of verdicts.

Case study (From West Law)

Campbell (Aaron) vs HM advocate

High Court of Justiciary (Appeal)

[2019] HCJAC 58; [2019] 9 WLUK 56; 2019 G.W.D. 28-457;

Subject: Sentencing

Keywords: Abduction; Appeals; Child offenders; Murder; Rape; Scotland; Sentence length; Sentencing

Summary

An appeal by a male, aged 16 at the relevant time, against the imposition of a sentence of detention without limit with a punishment part of 27 years for the abduction, murder and rape of a six-year-old girl, would be allowed where the trial judge had led the trial judge to make inadequate allowance for the mitigatory effect of youth and a punishment part of 24 years would be substituted.

Abstract

A male, convicted by unanimous verdict of the abduction, murder and vaginal and anal rape of a six-year-old girl, when he was 16 years old, appealed against the imposition of a sentence of detention without limit with a punishment part of 27 years on the basis that it was excessive.

It was submitted that while the crime was an uncommonly grave one which, for an adult, would have attracted a substantial punishment part, the trial judge had placed undue weight on the pessimistic assessment of his ability to change; such an assessment was more a question of future risk rather than aggravation to be reflected in the punishment part.

Code of Civil Procedure (CRPC)—(India)

The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is the main period on the procedure for administration of criminal law in India. It came into force on 1 April 1974. It provides the power for the investigation of criminal activity, the intention of suspected criminals, collection of evidence, determination of guilt or innocence of the accused person and the determination of punishment of the guilty. It also deals with public nuisance, prevention of offences and maintenance of family members.

Case Study (From West Law)

Guruviah and another v State, represented by Inspector of Police

Supreme Court of India

Criminal Appeal No(s). 1208 of 2019 (Arising out of S. L. P. (Crl.) No. 1658 of 2019) with Criminal Appeal No(s). 1209 of 2019 (Arising out of S. L. P. (Crl.) No. 3985 of 2019)

Summary

The appellants, who are village assistants, challenge their conviction under Sections 13(1)(d), 13(2) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as “the Act”) with fine and a default stipulation sentencing them to one year of rigorous imprisonment. The appellants have been acquitted of the charge under Section 7 of the Act and Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. The village administrative officer, accused no.1, was convicted under Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) and 12 of the Act. He has since been deceased during the pendency of his separate appeal.

The appellants were village assistants in the office of the village administrative officer, arrayed as accused 2 and 3. On 17.12.2003, P.W. 2 lodged a written complaint before the Additional Superintendent of Police (Vigilance and Anti-Corruption) that the village administrative officer had demanded a sum of Rs. 600/- for signing the necessary papers to facilitate the transfer of electric connection in the name of the complainant. The illegal gratification is stated to have been handed over to one of the appellants on the instruction of the village administrative officer, and who after counting it handed it over to the other appellant. They were apprehended by the trap officials immediately thereafter and the money recovered.

Some Common Criminal Procedures

When a defendant goes on trial for allegedly committing a crime, an undertaking must establish that the defendant is guilty of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. At the same time, the defendant is authorized to present a defence and may do so through different means. The defendant may attempt to find loopholes in the prosecutor’s case, argue that another individual who committed the crime, or argue that he \ she did commit the crime but had a legal defence for said commitment. There are various criminal defences are present which may allow a defendant to avoid punishment for his or her actions.

Meaning of Bail and Bond

Once a person is in police custody and is charged with an alleged offence, He /She may be able to get out of jail by posting bail or obtaining a bond. A judge regulates the amount of bail based on factors like the seriousness of the alleged offence, the probability that the defendant will commit supplemented crimes after being set free, and the chances that the defendant will flee the jurisdiction before trial. A judge may set bail at any amount which is not questioned or deny bail altogether. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits “Excessive Bail” but does not state that the said conditions are required to allow bail.

Differences between Bail and Bond

The words ‘Bail ‘and ‘Bond’ are often used almost use to alternate facts when discussing jail release, and while they are closely related to each other, they are not the same thing. Bail is the money where a respondent must pay in order to get out of jail. A bond is posted on a respondent’s behalf, usually by a bail bond company, to secure his /her release.

Plea Bargain

Majority of criminal sentence result from plea bargains. Their prevalence has arisen as a matter of necessity for many prosecutors and judges since the criminal justice system has become overload and incompetent. In a plea bargain, the defendant and the prosecutor reach an agreement in which the defendant pleads guilty or no contest in exchange for concessions by the prosecutor. These might involve a reduction in the level of the charge, a recommendation for a lenient sentence, or a reduction in the number of charges if the defendant is facing multiple charges.

Many people believe that plea bargains are an improper shortcut that denies a defendant their right to have their voice heard in court. However, they are firmly entered in the system. Defendants often appreciate the ability to arrange a result that allows them to move forward with their life and avoid the unsettle plea of a trial.

Parole and Probation

Probation and parole are considered as some advantages which allow criminals to avoid prison or to be set free from prison after serving only a quarter of their sentences. The goals of probation and parole are to readapt the offenders and guide them back into society while lowering the fact that they will commit a new offence.

Probation Violations

The term ‘probation’ refers to a variety of alternatives to incarceration. It is also known as ‘community supervision’ or ‘suspended sentencing’ in some circumstances. Probation is common for many first offenders and juvenile criminals. If the defendant meets all of the court-ordered conditions during the probation period, the court will set free the defendant from further stated responsibility. If the defendant fails to meet one or more conditions, however, Executioner may ask the court to revoke probation, which could result in the imposition of the original sentence.

The above mentioned are some of the common criminal procedures involved. Being a Criminal Lawyer is not an easy job. A Criminal Lawyer thinks like a Criminal in order to obtain the facts and statements regarding the case or argument. Here are some examples of questions where a criminal lawyer delivers with the intention of knowing the answer. But the lawyer delivers a question in such a manner where delivering an answer is really a tough part.

Do the police need to read the cigarette warnings before talking to a suspect? Do the police need to use specific facts in reading the cigarette warnings? Was my client under arrest if the police did not read his rights? Can the police give cigarette warnings midway through an interrogation? Can tangible evidence be admitted if it was discovered because of a Cigarette violation? When are search rules triggered?

The above-mentioned examples of questions on how a criminal lawyer comes up with.

Top 10 Criminal Lawyers in India

1.Ram Jethmalani(Late)

2.KTS.Tulsi

3.Siddhartha Luthra

4.Pinky Anand

5.Salman Khurshid

6.Kapil Sibal

7.Gopal Subramaniam

8.Parag Tripathi

9.Mukhil Rotaghi

10.Sushil Kumar (3)

Conclusion

Hence, I conclude my Research article with the provided facts and statement and facts mentioned above. The above-mentioned facts and statements are my Analysis and Research based on Criminal law and some of the points are being referred on the internet which will be stated in the Foot Notes mentioned below. In the above article, the basics concepts involved in criminal have been stated.

Foot Notes

Footnotes are the facts which are taken in reference from the internet in order to give an exact meaning and content of the given topic. In this Article, wherever a numerical factor is present, those are the points which are being referred to using the internet. The URL for the mentioned will also be present.

1) https://www.britannica.com/topic/criminal-law

2) https://blog.ipleaders.in/top-10-criminal-lawyers-in-delhi/

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skill.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

The post Criminal Law-An Insight appeared first on iPleaders.

Criminal Law-An Insight published first on https://namechangers.tumblr.com/

0 notes

marymosley · 6 years ago

Text

Custodial Deaths in India: An Analysis

Introduction

The word custody implies guardianship and protective care. Even when applied to indicate arrest or incarceration, it does not carry any sinister symptoms of violence during custody. No civilized law postulates custodial cruelty – an inhuman trait that springs out of a perverse desire to cause suffering when there is no possibility of any retaliation; a senseless exhibition of superiority and physical power over the one who is overpowered or a collective wrath of hypocritical thinking. It is one of the worst crimes in the civilized society, governed by the rule of law and poses a serious threat to an orderly civilized society. Torture in custody flouts the basic rights of the citizens and is an affront to human dignity.

Prisoners have human rights and prison torture is the confession of the failure to do justice to living man. For a prisoner, all fundamental rights are an enforceable reality, though restricted by the fact of imprisonment. Simply stated, the death of a person in custody whether of the Police or Judicial will amount to Custodial Death. The figures of NHRC show a total of 894 deaths in judicial custody.The letter, signed by the joint registrar (Law) of the National Human Rights Commission, stated that Uttar Pradesh leads the chart of deaths in judicial custody by a significant margin, with 204 deaths recorded in the period between 1 January 2017 and 2 August, 2017. The state was followed by Punjab with 76 deaths and Bihar with 64 deaths.Needless to say, a large number of custodial violence incidents go unreported. Arun Shourie once observed: The victims were invariably poor. Several of them hauled in on no formal charges at all. Even in the case of persons who were arrested, in an overwhelmingly large number of cases they were all accused of petty offences n fact, the victims of custodial violence are people from poor and backward sections of the society with little political or financial power to back them. Personal enmity, caste and political considerations and at times pecuniary benefits become important considerations for custodial deaths rather than investigation of cases.

Judicial Custody death

Before I put down my views on custodial deaths I would like to quote Alexander the Great that “If I can love myself despite of my infinite faults, how can I hate anyone at the glimpse of few faults”. Our constitution has enshrined fundamental rights to guarantee certain basic rights and liberties to our citizens and several institutes are making a praiseworthy effort to assure the reach and exercise of such rights by the common man. In the case of judicial custody the accused is sent to jail (prison) where for the purpose of investigation the police requires the permission of jail authority. So the deaths that occur in jail while in Judicial Custody are called as judicial custody death. Judicial custody deaths are basically classified into two parts that are Natural death and Unnatural death. In the case of Natural death the SDM has the right to conduct magisterial enquiry under 176 CrPc and in such case no compensation is provided by state. But the exception is Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh as they provide a compensation of Rs. 20,000 in the case of Natural death also. The Unnatural deaths are consider under four sub points that are Suicide (309 IPC), Accidental death (304A IPC), Murder (302 IPC), Medical Negligence (304 IPC). In such cases the Judicial Magistrate under 176CrPc conduct magisterial enquiry and in all such cases compensation are provided to the victims. The SC/ST are given more compensation in case of death in jail.

Following guidelines are followed while conducting the magisterial enquiry in case of custodial death

Magisterial enquiry is conducted at the earliest without undue delay.

The Enquiry magistrate should visit the place of occurrence to the acquaintance with the facts on ground. During the visit to the scene of crime, the Enquiry Officer should make an attempt to identify natural witnesses who are likely to have been present at the scene of crime. Enquiry Officer should take them into confidence and try to record their statements.. The motive so given should be thoroughly investigated for its veracity or otherwise.

A public notice is issued through the vernacular newspapers to inform witnesses concerned with the enquiry. The enquiry magistrate should ensure that the information reaches all concerned particularly the close relatives of the victim. A free and fair opportunity should be given to the relatives of the victim while recording their statements.

The magisterial enquiry should cover the following aspects.

a) The circumstances of death

b) The manner and sequence of incidents leading to death

c) The cause of death

d) Any person found responsible for the death, or suspicion of foul play that emerges during the enquiry.

e) Act of commission/omission on the part of public servants that contributed to the death

f) Adequacy of medical treatment provided to the deceased.

5. The enquiry magistrate should examine and verify the following records.

a) Inquest Report

b) Post Mortem Report: It is seen that the Enquiry Officer does not analyze the Post Mortem report; no attempt is made to draw any inference about the genuineness or otherwise of the encounter. PM report should be thoroughly analyzed; if necessary, help of State FSL should be taken.

c) Viscera Analysis Report

d) Histopathological Examination Report

e) Final cause of death

f) MLC report/Initial Health Screening Report of the prisoner

g) Medical treatment records

h) Inquiry/Investigation report of the police

i) FIR/General Diary (GD) entries/any other relevant police records.

j) Ballistic examination reports of weapon and cartridges, if any, alleged to be used in the incident by the deceased.

k) Forensic examination report of ‘hand wash’ of the deceased.

l) The finger print expert report on finger print impression available on weapon alleged to have been used by the deceased.

6. The magistrate should examine family members and relative of the deceased, eye witnesses having information of the circumstances leading to Custodial death, doctors who have conducted the post mortem/provided treatment to the deceased, concerned police/prison officials, independent witnesses, co-prisoners and other such relevant persons.

Analytical study of the custodial violence

Human Rights are those fundamental rights that are inherent and inalienable for the survival of individual in the society. In the new millennium, by virtue of international declaration, it is the duty and the responsibility of the welfare state to protect these rights of individuals. The whole of constitutional machinery also aims at protecting the human rights. The Constitution of India, 1950 under Part III which deals with fundamental rights. These are also considered as the basic human values. All these rights are inconsonance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. Talking retrospectively, according to Montesque theory in India, there is separation of powers. Accordingly, there are three wings of the state, which play vital role for any type of tasks for the protection and preservation of human rights. These are legislative executive and judiciary. Besides this, press is considered as the fourth wing of the welfare state. In day-to-day life, the media is highlighting a lot of violation of human rights of citizens. .

It is astonishing fact that among all the violence, the most alarming problem in present millennium is of custodial death. A case pertaining to judicial custody death of Uttar Pradesh in which the Commission, on receiving information of the custodial death of a prisoner named Dhirender Singh in the District Jail, Jaunpur, called for a detailed report from the Government of Uttar Pradesh. The report that was received stated that certain Anti-Social elements had gone to the main gate of the District Jail on that date and had asked for an under-trial prisoner, Jaya Prakash Singh, on the pretext that they had to hand-over a letter to him. Jaya Prakash Singh went to the main gate, where the deceased was also present at that time. The ‘anti-social elements’ fired at Jaya Prakash Singh, but he escaped. However, a stray bullet hit the deceased in his stomach. He was rushed to the hospital where he was declared dead. The report further stated that the deceased had gone to the main gate to collect milk, bread and paper as he was authorized to do so. A detailed magisterial inquiry that was instituted to look into the matter arrived at the conclusion that there was negligence on the part of the jail authorities and that this had resulted in the death of Dhirender Singh.

In view of the findings of negligence/lapses on the part of the prison administration, the Commission issued a show cause notice to the State Government asking as to why immediate interim relief is not paid to the next of kin of the deceased. As no reply was received from the State Government in respect of the show cause notice, the Commission by its order awarded a sum of Rs. 75,000/- as immediate interim relief to the next of kin of the deceased.

While Going through a case in the NHRC which was related to the Judicial Custody death there was a person who was admitted to Jail and 5 days after entering the Jail he died in the custody. So the initial screening test of the prisoner was that a normal medical test was conducted for him and the person was under a treatment of heart blockage for past 3 years in a local hospital and if so was the case why was he admitted to Jail when they were aware that a proper treatment of him was going on in a hospital and even if he was admitted to Jail why was he not given proper treatment for his disease. The information that I could collect after talking to many people in NHRC was that the authority doesn’t take a proper screening medical test due to insufficient funds and many more reasons, which is actually a foul practice on the part of the authority.

While going through another case in NHRC regarding to Judicial Custodial death of UTP Bhairo Singh. The initial health screening report of deceased reveals that deceased was not suffering from any disease at the time of admission in the jail but he died the 2-nd day of entering in the jail due to Brain hemorrhage. According to the Post mortem report 4 abrasion of different size on elbow and ankle. The point here was that when the prisoner was bleeding from the mouth why was he not referred to the District hospital Mirzapur. I think there is negligence on part of the Authority as they are not able to record the actual initial screening report of the prisoners also according to the statistics of the prisoner statistics of India 2015 the total capacity of Jail in the country is 3,66,781 as reflected in Table 2 and the total number of inmates as on 31.12.2015 were 4,19,623 as reflected in Table 3 of the statistics. So this reflects that the number of inmates are more than the capacity in the jail this is also a drawback as proper care of the inmates is not possible as which is also the cause Custodial deaths.

Total Number of Jails in the Country : 1,401

Table 1

Central jails : 134

District jails : 379

Sub jails : 741

Women jails : 18

Open jails : 63

Borstal schools: 20

Special jails : 43

Other jails : 3

Total Capacity of Jails in the Country : 3,66,781

Table 2

Central jails : 1,59,158 (43.4%)

District jails : 1,37,972 (37.6%)

Sub jails : 46,368 (12.6%)

Women jails : 4,748 (1.3%)

Open jails : 5,370 (1.5%)

Borstal schools: 1,830 (0.5%)

Special jails : 10,915 (3.0%)

Other jails : 420 (0.1%)

Total Number of Jail Inmates as on 31.12.2015 : 4,19,623

Table 3

Male : 4,01,789 (95.7%)

Female : 17,834 (4.3%)

Occupancy Rate

Table 4

2013 – 118.4%

2014 – 117.4%

2015 – 114.4%

Convicts : 1,34,168 (32.0% of total inmates)

Male :1,28,428 (95.7% of total convicts)

Female : 5,740 (4.3% of total convicts)

Under trials: 2,82,076 (67.2% of total inmates)

Male :2,70,160 (95.8% of total undertrials)

Female :11,916 (4.2% of total undertrials)

Recall the suicide by one of the accused in Delhi gang rape case within 72 hours in March 2013 in Tihar Central Prison underscore the need to understand the factors behind committing suicide in prison. While suicide is recognized as a critical problem within Jail environment, the issue of prison suicide has not received comparable attention. However for making meaningful analysis and to understand patterns from the suicide deaths occurring in prisons, it is essential to understand the age group of deceased, period of detention, time of committing suicide, place and manner used, medical history including mental health, environmental factors, any prior history of suicide etc. so that corrective measures could be devised to remove the factors that facilitates in commission of suicide.

In Indian context, suicide death accounts for almost 71% of unnatural deaths reported in prison. It is also to note that suicide in a prison can have long-term effects on its culture (i.e., cause high level of stress on staff and inmates that have to deal with the aftermaths of an inmate suicide). Survivors of suicide are also often at a higher risk of suicide as they deal with the grief of the loss of a loved one. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Nilabati Beheracase asserted that the convicts, prisoner or under-trials are not denuded of their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution and there is a corresponding responsibility on the prison authority to make sure that person in custody are not deprived of the Right of Life. The state has the duty of care, to ensure that the guarantee of Article 21 is not denied to anyone. The state must take responsibility by paying compensation to the near and dear ones of a person, who has been deprived of her/ his life by the wrongful act of its agents.

Based on the legal pronouncement, the following points can be deducted:

1. Vicarious liability of the State-Since inmates in prison is under the safe custody of the state thus it is the responsibility of the state to ensure safety, security and wellbeing. IN case of any negligence or violation, the state is vicariously liable for the act of omission on the part of Jail Authority.

2. Liability under public Torts– As compared to civil liability under the laws of private torts, for violation of fundamental rights, the remedy Is not available in public law is not only to civilize public power but also to ensure the citizen that they live under a legal system wherein the right and interested shall be protected and preserved. The compensation is in the nature of the exemplary damages awarded against the wrongdoer for the breach of its public law duty.

3. Recovery of amount of compensation from wrongdoerThrough the state is responsible to pay compensation on account of principle of vicarious liability but it is entitled to recover the amount from wrongdoer or delinquent officials responsible for negligence or commission of act.

My ardent concern is that the State cannot debase bastilles by zoological bestiality inflicted on criminals. It is psychiatric nonsense and medical menace to inflict injuries as a healing process. It is nobly believed that criminals are made and not born, and are curably human and not irredeemably brutish. Crimes are the psychotic syndromes and medico-legal recipes inside prisons where social beings are kindled are not killed must heal patients suffering from this. But I will take a stand that “Why are prisoners still treated as alien in the lay mans land”. Our aim is to strive towards the goals of creating a just world where avoidable suffering and noxious negativity is extirpated and plentiful love, concerns overflows because every life in this world is painted by God and we are no one to make anyone’s life colourless. To boost the morale of all those who are travelling to end continuous human rights violation, Thomas Alva Edison said that, “I will not say that I failed 1000 times, I will say that I discovered there are 1000 ways which can cause failure.”

We still confide in our authority because they are trying fervently to doff the dust off their coats. They have the courage to lose the sights of the shore and by carrying this attitude only new oceans can be discovered.

Recommendation

The solution to the problem would as such lie in measures to prevent such details from custodial deaths, in fact, such violence itself, and reduce the number of custodial deaths to the extent possible in other circumstances by evolving efficient systems and procedure for prompt and adequate medical aid, where required, and reasonable preventive measures against accidents and suicide. At the same time, it would also be necessary to put such deaths in proper perspective to change the present public perception and establish administrative in the matter.

The post Custodial Deaths in India: An Analysis appeared first on Legal Desire.

Custodial Deaths in India: An Analysis published first on https://immigrationlawyerto.tumblr.com/

0 notes

marymosley · 6 years ago

Text

Custodial Deaths in India: An Analysis

Introduction

Judicial Custody death

Following guidelines are followed while conducting the magisterial enquiry in case of custodial death

Magisterial enquiry is conducted at the earliest without undue delay.

The magisterial enquiry should cover the following aspects.

a) The circumstances of death

b) The manner and sequence of incidents leading to death

c) The cause of death

d) Any person found responsible for the death, or suspicion of foul play that emerges during the enquiry.

e) Act of commission/omission on the part of public servants that contributed to the death

f) Adequacy of medical treatment provided to the deceased.

5. The enquiry magistrate should examine and verify the following records.

a) Inquest Report

c) Viscera Analysis Report

d) Histopathological Examination Report

e) Final cause of death

f) MLC report/Initial Health Screening Report of the prisoner

g) Medical treatment records

h) Inquiry/Investigation report of the police

i) FIR/General Diary (GD) entries/any other relevant police records.

j) Ballistic examination reports of weapon and cartridges, if any, alleged to be used in the incident by the deceased.

k) Forensic examination report of ‘hand wash’ of the deceased.

l) The finger print expert report on finger print impression available on weapon alleged to have been used by the deceased.

Analytical study of the custodial violence

Total Number of Jails in the Country : 1,401

Table 1

Central jails : 134

District jails : 379

Sub jails : 741

Women jails : 18

Open jails : 63

Borstal schools: 20

Special jails : 43

Other jails : 3

Total Capacity of Jails in the Country : 3,66,781

Table 2

Central jails : 1,59,158 (43.4%)

District jails : 1,37,972 (37.6%)

Sub jails : 46,368 (12.6%)

Women jails : 4,748 (1.3%)

Open jails : 5,370 (1.5%)

Borstal schools: 1,830 (0.5%)

Special jails : 10,915 (3.0%)

Other jails : 420 (0.1%)

Total Number of Jail Inmates as on 31.12.2015 : 4,19,623

Table 3

Male : 4,01,789 (95.7%)

Female : 17,834 (4.3%)

Occupancy Rate

Table 4

2013 – 118.4%

2014 – 117.4%

2015 – 114.4%

Convicts : 1,34,168 (32.0% of total inmates)

Male :1,28,428 (95.7% of total convicts)

Female : 5,740 (4.3% of total convicts)

Under trials: 2,82,076 (67.2% of total inmates)

Male :2,70,160 (95.8% of total undertrials)

Female :11,916 (4.2% of total undertrials)

Based on the legal pronouncement, the following points can be deducted:

Recommendation

The post Custodial Deaths in India: An Analysis appeared first on Legal Desire.

Custodial Deaths in India: An Analysis published first on https://immigrationlawyerto.tumblr.com/

0 notes