Category: Criminal

This category collects the criminal laws of India and abroad. Multiple statutes have been analysed and several laws have ben explained.

Death warrant of King Charles I (1649)

Whereas Charles Steuart Kinge of England is and standeth convicted attaynted and condemned of High Treason and other high Crymes, And sentence uppon Saturday last was pronounced against him by this Court to be putt to death by the severinge of his head from his body Of wch sentence execucon yet remayneth to be done

Ashok Kumar Todi vs Kishwar Jahan & Ors 18/05/ 2010

CBI – investigation-in this case, the CID erroneously asserted that the complaint before the Karaya Police Station did not disclose any cognizable offence and consequently, proceeded with the preliminary investigation for the 23 days by registering the same as a case of unnatural death. Such conduct of the CID is also one among others indicated above to conclude that there was genuine apprehension in the mind of the writ-petitioners that proper investigation will not be done by the CID to protect some influential persons.

Sri Chhatradhar Mahato & Others vs The State Of West Bengal-14/08/2019

It is true that a flea-bite sentence should not be awarded for a serious offence. At the same time, one has to take into consideration diverse factors in awarding a sentence. Not only is the gravity of the crime to be considered, the other factors like the range of sentence imposable and the minimum sentence fixed, if any, are also to be taken into account. The aggravating as well as the mitigating circumstances are to be carefully weighed. For instance, in the present case, the aggravating factors are the seriousness of the crimes and the recovery of relatively sophisticated items like gelatin sticks and detonators. On the other hand, the mitigating factors are the acquittal of the accused under Section 307 of the Penal Code and the non-seizure of any huge cache’ of arms or more sophisticated and lethal weapons like rocket launchers or RDX. Keeping all these factors in mind, an adequate sentence is to be imposed in this case.

State thr. P.G, Sindh v. Ahmed Omer Shaikh-28/01/2021-Daniel Pearl Case

Keeping the prosecution evidence in its true and correct perspective, it is established beyond any reasonable doubt that: the identity of accused Ahmed Omar Sheikh, and him being part of the conspiratorial agreement with Arif alias Hashim and Fahad Naseem has been duly established; Ahmed Omar Sheikh was the person who met Daniel Pearl in Room No. 411 Akbar International Hotel, and was also ‘last seen’ with Daniel Pearl on 23.01.2002; the email dated 30.01.2002 at 14:19:43 PST was sent from the Hotmail account of accused Fahad Naseem on the directions of Ahmad Omar Sheikh.

Sec 268 Public Nuisance

The proceedings under Section 133 are more in the nature of civil proceedings than of criminal nature. Section 133(1)(b) relates to trade or occupation which is injurious to health or physical comfort. It itself deals with physical comfort to the community and not with those which are not in themselves nuisance but in the course of which public nuisance is committed. In order to bring a trade or occupation within the operation of this Section, it must be shown that the interference with public comfort was considerable and a large section of the public was affected injuriously.

Sec 491 IPC-Breach of contract to attend on and supply wants of helpless person

Whoever, being bound by a lawful contract to attend on or to supply the wants of any person who, by reason of youth, or of unsoundness of mind, or of a disease or bodily weakness, is helpless or incapable of providing for his own safety or of supplying his own wants, voluntarily omits so to do, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both.

Sumedh Singh Saini Vs. State of Punjab and Anr- 3/12/2020

FIR has been lodged/filed by the brother of the deceased after a period of almost 29 years from the date of incident and after a period of 9 years from the date of decision of this Court in the case of Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar (supra) and nothing is on record that in between he had taken any steps to initiate criminal proceedings and/or lodged an FIR, we are of the opinion that at least a case is made out by the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C. Many a time, delay may not be fatal to the criminal proceedings. However, it always depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. However, at the same time, a long delay like 29 years as in the present case can certainly be a valid consideration for grant of anticipatory bail.