Ajaykumar Sunilkumar Sharma Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2013 SCC OnLine Bom 359

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. Ajaykumar Sunilkumar Sharma...

The Court held in the Instant case that the following, among other circumstances, can generally be used to determine if someone had the intent to cause death:

  1. The type of weapon used,
  2. whether the accused carried the weapon or if it was picked up there,
  3. whether the blow is intended at a crucial area of the body,
  4. The amount of force used to inflict harm,
  5. Whether the act occurred during a sudden argument,
  6. Whether the incident was accidental or the result of premeditation,
  7. Whether the deceased was a stranger or there had been any prior animosity,
  8. Whether there was any serious or unexpected provocation, and if so, what caused it,
  9. Whether the alleged offender delivered a single strike or multiple blows,
  10. Whether the alleged victim of injury was unfairly treated or acted in a cruel and unusual manner.
Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Assessing Liability of Authorized Signatories in Cheque Dishonour

He who signs a dishonored cheque bears the consequences— a principle well-established by law and affirmed across several precedents. Determining the liability of a signatory is straightforward when the drawer is an individual. But what happens when a cheque is issued on behalf of a juristic person, such as a company? Who is held... Read more »

UNITECH Limited & ors. v. Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (TSIIC) & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 317 of 2021, decided on 07-02-2021

The presence of an arbitration clause does oust the jurisdiction under Article 226 in all cases though, it still needs to be decided from case to case as to whether recourse to a public law remedy can justifiably be invoked. Read more »

Muthulakshmi v. Vijitha CRP No16753 of 2021, 11-06-2021

The Madras High Court has held that a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is maintainable to seek the quashing of proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act. Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.