https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126847 Inordinate delay in pronouncing a reserved judgment was treated as inconsistent with fair procedure and speedy adjudication under Article 21, and the Court issued administrative directions to secure prompt pronouncement of reserved matters. On the criminal liability issue, the evidence supported murder conviction only against the principal assailant; for the remaining accused, constructive liability for murder under Section 149 was not established because the common object to commit murder was not proved. Their liability was confined to unlawful assembly with deadly weapons and related arms offences, while minor discrepancies, hostile testimony, and delayed FIR transmission were not found sufficient to discredit the prosecution. en-us Mon, 06 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Oct 2013 17:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126847 Inordinate delay in pronouncing a reserved judgment was treated as inconsistent with fair procedure and speedy adjudication under Article 21, and the Court issued administrative directions to secure prompt pronouncement of reserved matters. On the criminal liability issue, the evidence supported murder conviction only against the principal assailant; for the remaining accused, constructive liability for murder under Section 149 was not established because the common object to commit murder was not proved. Their liability was confined to unlawful assembly with deadly weapons and related arms offences, while minor discrepancies, hostile testimony, and delayed FIR transmission were not found sufficient to discredit the prosecution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 06 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126847