Shajahan Vs. State, (2018) 13 SCC 347

Home
/
Publications
/
Case Snippets
/
Shajahan Vs. State,...

The court observed that, during the process of performing dacoity, if a dacoit murders a person, all the co-dacoits will also be held liable under section 396 IPC, even if they did not participate in the killing, and were only a part of the dacoity. Both 302 and 396 IPC have the same obligations for imposing a death penalty or imprisonment for life. Although the offence under Section 396 IPC is to be treated seriously, the court has more discretion when it comes to the potential for imposing a punishment other than death penalty or imprisonment for life when the criminal under Section 396 IPC is found guilty.

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

Rama KT. Barman (Died) Thr. LRS Vs. MD. Mahim Ali & Ors., Civil Appeal No.3500/2024

The Hon’ble Supreme Court while testing an impugned judgment in which the Hon’ble High Court had framed four substantial questions of law which were neither raised before the trial court nor opportunity was given to the parties to lead evidence for the same, and it was held that an appellate court cannot create a new... Read more » Read more »

Bulldozer Justice Simply Unnacceptable – Citizens’ voices cannot be throttled by a threat of destroying their homes.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court while adjudicating a Suo Moto Writ Petition captioned “In Re Manoj Tibrewal Akash, 2024 INSC 863”(registered on the basis of a letter by a senior journalist) held that the state must follow due process of law before taking action to remove illegal encroachments or unlawfully constructed structures and issued a slew... Read more » Read more »

Supreme Court Reiterates Narrow Scope Of Interference Under Section 37 Arbitration Act

In Somdatt Builders – NCC – NEC (JV) vs. National Highways Authority of India & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 2058/2012), the Supreme Court upheld the arbitral tribunal’s award, emphasizing minimal judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. It reiterated that courts do not act as appellate bodies and can only set aside an... Read more » Read more »