Tuesday, September 28, 2021
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

Supreme Court says life imprisonment means rigorous imprisonment for life, dismisses SLP

The Supreme Court confirming its 1983 verdict opined that this Judgement is fixed in law so there is no need to review it again.

Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

The Supreme Court has held that the sentence of life imprisonment has to be equated to rigorous imprisonment for life in a plea challenging the order of the Gauhati High Court, whose conviction and sentence was upheld, and the SLP dismissed.

The petitioner, Md Alfaz Ali, had been convicted under Section 302 IPC for killing his wife suspecting her of infidelity and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life by the Gauhati High Court. He then moved the SLP in the Supreme Court, which was heard by a bench of Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice B.R. Gavai.

Petitioner’s counsel A. Sirajudeen submitted that the issue is no more res integra as it is covered by a judgment of this Court in Naib Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Assam counsel Debojit Borkakati submitted the arguments that are advanced in these cases have been considered by the Supreme Court earlier and were rejected relying upon the judgment of this Court in Dilpesh Balchandra Panchal v. State of Gujarat. Accordingly, the bench confirmed its 1983 verdict and opined that this Judgement is fixed in law, so there is no need to review it again.

Also Read: Supreme Court dissolves 20-year-old marriage that was never consummated

According to the case of Naib Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors, the petitioner relates to sentence of imprisonment for life not to be equated to rigorous imprisonment for life. The court taking into account the earlier judgments in Pandit Kishori Lal v. King Emperor and Gopal Vinayak Godse v. State of Maharashtra held in Naib Singh case that the sentence of imprisonment for life has to be equated to rigorous imprisonment for life.

The court dismissed the petition mentioning that the law laid down by it in Naib Singh’s was followed in three judgments Dilpesh Balchandra Panchal v. State of Gujarat, Sat Pal alias Sadhu v. State of Haryana 5 and Mohd. Munna v. Union of India.

MD.-ALFAZ-ALI-2

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

News Update

Farmer blocking roads: 4-member committee formed for discussion, says Haryana in SC

Haryana government told the Supreme Court that sincere efforts were being made to remove the blockades from Inter-State roads and National Highways and to resume free flow of traffic on those roads for the convenience of general public by way of persuading the Farmers/Farmer’s Organisations to cooperate

Bombay High Court grants bail to man booked for post against Dr BR Ambedkar on social media

A man booked for putting up a post on his Facebook account, which allegedly disrespected Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (Baba Saheb Ambedkar), was granted anticipatory bail by the Bombay High Court on a PR bond of Rs 20,000
Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.