TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court affirms murder convictions with life imprisonment, emphasizing common intention and joint liability</h1> <h3>Hethubha and Ors. Versus The State of Gujarat</h3> The Supreme Court upheld the convictions under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, affirming the life imprisonment sentence imposed ... - Issues:1. Charges under Sections 302 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Identification of accused and relationship between parties.3. Pre-arranged plan and common intention.4. Interpretation of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.5. Conviction and sentencing.Analysis:1. Charges under Sections 302 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code:The appellants were charged with offenses under Sections 302 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death of one individual and causing hurt to another. The deceased was the brother-in-law of one of the victims, and key eyewitnesses were identified in the case.2. Identification of accused and relationship between parties:Accused individuals were identified, and their relationships were established, highlighting familial ties and living arrangements. The prosecution presented a case involving a prior quarrel and subsequent threats made by the accused towards the victims.3. Pre-arranged plan and common intention:The judgment detailed a pre-arranged plan by the accused to attack the victims upon their return home. The court found evidence of a concerted attack under a common intention, emphasizing the participation and united criminal behavior of all accused parties.4. Interpretation of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code:The court referred to legal precedents to interpret Section 34, emphasizing the element of participation in actions and the need for a pre-arranged plan to establish common intention. The judgment highlighted the joint liability principle embodied in Section 34.5. Conviction and sentencing:After a trial, the accused were initially convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Judge. However, differing opinions arose in the High Court, leading to a review under Section 429 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The final judgment upheld the convictions under Section 302 read with Section 34, altering the previous verdicts and imposing life imprisonment on the accused.In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentencing of the accused based on the established pre-arranged plan, common intention, and joint liability under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment emphasized the need for a comprehensive review of the case under Section 429 and the application of legal principles to establish guilt in the murder case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
