Question
In which case, while fastening the liability on the
accused, the Court stated that – “They also serve who only stand and wait”?Solution
IPC The judgment passed by the Privy Council in Mahboob Shah vs. Emperor case, became a landmark judgment as it differentiated between common intention and same intention. The judgment even in today's era is relevant and also of great importance. Barendra Kumar Ghosh v. King Emperor: Lord Sumner dismissed the appeal against the conviction and held that – “criminal acts means that unity of criminal behaviour which results in something for which an individual would be responsible, if it were all done by himself alone, that is, in criminal offence.” Nitya Sen v. State of West Bengal: It has therefore been proved beyond doubt that there was not only ample opportunity for a preconcert, but that the assailants, including the appellant, committed the murder of Chintamoni Ghosh in pursuance of a pre-concerted plan, in a cold blooded manner. The High Court therefore rightly held that the prosecution had succeeded in proving that the murder as committed in furtherance of the common intention of the three accused who have been convicted and sentenced by both the courts below.
Where a person who is in a position to dominate the will of another, enters into a contract with him, and the transaction appears, on the face of it or ...
When Court refers parties to suit for settlement of dispute under Section 89 of the code of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff is :
Adult suffrage means-
What constitutes an assault under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
Under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, who is responsible for granting approval for access to biological resources for commercial use?
As per the Specific Relief Act when can section 8 of the Act be invoked ___
Which statement best describes a temporary injunction?
Under the provisions of The Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, which of the following is not a requisite regarding inspection of a rented premise?
Who has power to reduce or remit court fee under Court Fee Act, 1870?
What can a Head of Department do to avoid punishment if their department violates the Act?