Content Provider | Supreme Court of India |
---|---|
e-ISSN | 30484839 |
Language | English |
Access Restriction | NDLI |
Subject Keyword | 307 and 302 1860: ss.147 Penal Code 448 326 436 149 325 148 379 342 |
Content Type | Text |
Resource Type | Law Judgement |
Jurisdiction | India |
Case Type | Appeal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Disposal Nature | Appeal Allowed |
Headnote | Penal Code, 1860: ss.147, 148, 149, 342, 448, 325, 326,436, 379, 307 and 302 – Political rivalry – Mob assault – Use ofsharp and pointed weapons – Death of 5 persons and seriousinjuries to several persons – Prosecution case was that the offenderparty broke into the houses of the locality, destroyed household,stole valuables and set the houses on fire and thereafter assaultedcomplainant party members causing death of 5 persons and seriousinjuries to 24 persons – Acquittal by trial court on benefit of doubt– High Court found no error in acquittal order – Complainant’sappeal against acquittal – Held: The observation of courts belowthat the injuries must have been suffered in a stampede is notconvincing as there was no reason for only one group of people tohave sustained injuries in the alleged stampede – The contradictionsand improvements were minor in nature – It is natural to have certainminor variations in the evidence of eye-witnesses, when a largenumber of people had gathered to assault a smaller group of people– In such a scenario, it is not possible to meticulously observe allthe actions of each and every accused – The overall evidence ofthese witnesses, prima facie, appeared untainted – Certainexaggerations, improvements and embellishments would not makethe entire prosecution story doubtful – There were as many as 24injured eye witnesses in the case and their presence cannot bedoubted – Presence of the witnesses on the spot was also notseriously doubted by the defence during the cross-examination – Inthis situation, the High Court did not apply its judicial mind indetermining whether the judgment of the trial court was perverseinasmuch as the entire body of evidence was discarded, simply onthe basis that some of the witnesses had deposed for the first timebefore the Court – High Court also did not at all consider the evidence concerning charges other than murder – Although, thecharges were framed on questions such as burning houses, unlawfulassembly, etc., the evidence on these questions was entirelyoverlooked and no finding was made by the trial court as well asthe High Court – High Court thus failed to exercise its revisionaljurisdiction in accordance with established principles – Matterremitted to High Court to decide the revision petition on merits inaccordance with law.Revision: Exercise of revisional jurisdiction – Where thematerial evidence was overlooked either by the trial Court or bythe appellate Court or the order is passed by considering irrelevantevidence, the revisional jurisdiction can be exercised by the HighCourt – Penal Code, 1860.Evidence: Embellishments or exaggerations in the testimony– Evidentiary value of the testimony – Held: The testimony of awitness cannot be discarded in toto merely due to the presence ofembellishments or exaggerations – The doctrine of falsus in uno,falsus in omnibus, which means “false in one thing, false ineverything” is inapplicable in the Indian scenario,where thetendency to exaggerate is common – Doctrine.Evidence: In cases involving a large number of offenders anda large number of victims, the evidence of only two or three witnesseswho give a consistent account of the incident is sufficient to sustainconviction.Evidence: Ocular and medical evidence – Conflict betweenthe ocular testimony and the medical evidence – Medical evidencecannot override the evidence of ocular testimony of the witnesses –Ocular testimony to prevail – Where the eye witnesses account isfound to be trustworthy and credible, medical opinion pointing toalternative possibilities is not accepted as conclusive.Constitution of India: Art.136 – Scope of – Held: Therestriction as contained under s.401(3) of the Cr.P.C. on the HighCourt cannot restrict the powers of the Supreme Court under Art.136of the Const itution – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973– s.401(3). |
Judge | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar |
Neutral Citation | 2018 INSC 751 |
Petitioner | Menoka Malik And Others |
Respondent | The State Of West Bengal And Others |
SCR | [2018] 10 S.C.R. 707 |
Judgement Date | 2018-08-28 |
Case Number | 1198 |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
Sl. | Authority | Responsibilities | Communication Details |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education |
Sanctioning Authority | https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives |
2 | Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project | https://www.iitkgp.ac.in |
3 | National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project | Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in |
4 | Project PI / Joint PI | Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project |
Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon |
5 | Website/Portal (Helpdesk) | Queries regarding NDLI and its services | support@ndl.gov.in |
6 | Contents and Copyright Issues | Queries related to content curation and copyright issues | content@ndl.gov.in |
7 | National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club) | Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach | clubsupport@ndl.gov.in |
8 | Digital Preservation Centre (DPC) | Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books | dpc@ndl.gov.in |
9 | IDR Setup or Support | Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops | idr@ndl.gov.in |