Skip to main content

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. DEEPAK (13 MARCH, 2019)

  

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. DEEPAK (13 MARCH, 2019)


INTRODUCTION

In India an attempt to suicide it all is culpable. Not just a suicide survivor is responsible to criminal punishment yet additionally the person who abets the commission of such suicide. The instance of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Deepak manages Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and questions the ability to practice amendment under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

FACTS

The respondent and the deceased were workers in the Central Bank. On ninth August 2017, the deceased ended it all by consuming toxin and was moved to the District emergency clinic for treatment. Around the same time within the sight of Naib Tehsildar of Neemuch the perishing assertion of the casualty was recorded, as indicated by which she claimed that she was attacked by Mr Deepak Bhamawat (hereinafter alluded to as the respondent) and couldn't land any position as a result of him. The deceased passed on tenth August 2017and on sixteenth August the FIR was enrolled for something very similar. After fulfilment of examination on 22nd September 2017, a charge sheet was submitted under the watchful eye of the Special Judge, Neemuch charging under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2) (v) and Section 3(2) (v) (a) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act. On awareness of which a criminal amendment was recorded under the watchful eye of the Court testing the above request. On 31st January 2018, the learned Single Judge of High Court of Madhya Pradesh passed the judgment releasing the respondent from charges by saving the request for Special Judge from that point, an allure was documented in the Supreme Court of India.

ISSUE

Whether the High Court under Section 397 read with 401 of Criminal Procedural Code correctly exercised its revisional jurisdiction by discharging the respondent of charges framed by Special Judge, Neemuch. 

CONTENTIONS RAISED

Based on the charge sheet, the Deputy Advocate General for the state battled that the respondent by manufacturing the deceased mark had taken a credit that was not paid and a notification was given by the Central Bank for something similar. During the examination, it was found that three protests were recorded by the deceased against the respondent to the Station house official at P.S. Jeeran on first November and first December 2016 and one more to the Collector of Neemuch on sixth January 2017 charging that the respondent was pestering her by making her fire her work and impelling her landowner to expel her from the house.

Then again, the guidance for the respondent fought that the claims referenced in the FIR was bogus and the High Court was supported in presuming that there was no incitement, instigation, or actuation to fit the depiction of 'abetment', supporting a charge under Section 306 of Penal Code.

OBSERVATIONS

The Court depending working on it of Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander which managed the revisional force of the Court saw that the privileges of the revisional force of the Court saw that the freedoms of revisional ward are restricted and ought not be against any between time or interlocutory request. Further, one ought to discover whether or not the archives submitted lays out the offense. The Court may possibly meddle when essential elements of a criminal offense are missing or then again assuming the charges are really ludicrous and implausible that no judicious individual can at any point arrive at such a resolution.

Further taking in view the instance of Ramesh Kumar v. State it was seen that where the blamed by his behaviours or acts makes such conditions that the deceased is left with no other decision except for to end his life by ending it all then in such case an 'impelling' might be gathered.

JUDGEMENT

Taking into view current realities, disputes, and proof set forth the Court expressed that in the given case there are adequate materials to maintain the request passed by the Trial Court. The materials arose over the span of examination connecting with the grievances recorded by the deceased, the credit deceitfully taken by the respondent by producing the mark of the deceased, the end of work and the expulsion of the deceased from the house affected by the respondent were obviously overlooked by the High Court. In light of these reasons the Supreme Court permitted the allure.

CONCLUSION

Saving the upbraided request of the High Court, the Supreme Court permitted the allure along these lines charging the respondent under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (2)(v) and Section 3 (2)(v)(a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.


By,

Asha Sebastian.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more