Criminal Law
Mode of Citation- ILC-2017-SC-CRL-....
Get started with Indian Law Cases
Your password will be generated automatically and will be sent to your email-id provided in this form.
Full Name  
Email ID
(this email-id will be treated as your User ID also)
Address
City
Mobile No
* Mobile No is required for verification of identity
 Bare Acts  | Legal Resources  | Lawyer Locater  | Articles  | Legal Dictionary  | Download Desktop Software  | Subscription   Home   |   E-Journal  |  Sign-In  | Contact Us  | Disclaimers

Criminal Law
 Search Tips
Criminal Law
Mode of Citation- ILC-2017-SC-CRL-....
Judgement Subject Index/Important Decision/Topic

ILC-2015-SC-CRL-Apr-33

Upendra Pradhan Vs. State of Orissa

Head Note

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 34 , Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection of Children) Act, 2000  - Section 2 , Section 7 , Section 15

Juvenile Justice Model Rules, 2007, Rule 12 - Appeal against Conviction - Juvenile in Conflict with Law - Age of the appellant on the date of occurrence i.e. 28.8.1993, was 17 years, 1 month & 20 days - Appellant falls within the definition of "juvenile" under Section 2(k) of the Act, 2000 - He can raise the plea of juvenility at any time and before any court as per the mandate of Section 7(a) and has rightly done so - Appellant has undergone about 8 years in jail - In addition to the fact that he was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence, the accused appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt - Therefore, the conviction order passed by the High Court is not sustainable in law - Even if the conviction is upheld, appellant has undergone almost 8 years of sentence, which is more than the maximum period of three years prescribed under Section 15 of the Act of 2000 - By giving him the benefit under the Act, decision of the High Court struck down.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 34 , The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  - Section 378

Appeal against Acquittal - In case there are two views which can be culled out from the perusal of evidence and application of law, the view which favours the accused should be taken - High Court should not have interfered with the decision taken by the Additional Session Judge, as the judgment passed was not manifestly illegal, perverse, and did not cause miscarriage of justice.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 34

Appeal against Conviction - Held that the testimonies of interested witnesses are of great importance and weightage - No man would be willing to spare the real culprit and frame an innocent person.

Topic(s)-Juvenile Justice - Murder - Acquittal

Important Decision(s)- The definition of "juvenile" under Section 2(k) of the Act, 2000 - He can raise the plea of juvenility at any time and before any court as per the mandate of Section 7(a) and has rightly done so.







Full Judgement Body


     
@2016 Indian Law
Name  
Email ID
Please Wait..