MD. JAMILUDIN NASIRversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL
- Citation
- 2015 INSC 316
- Decided
- 10 April 2015
- Disposal
- Case Allowed
Holding
The Supreme Court held that the conviction under Section 121 IPC was not sustainable and allowed the Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions.
Summary
The appellants were convicted under Section 121 of the Indian Penal Code for waging war against the State in a trial court in West Bengal. They appealed the conviction to the Calcutta High Court, which upheld the judgment. Subsequently, the appellants filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions before the Supreme Court seeking relief from the conviction. The Supreme Court examined the statutory elements of waging war and the evidentiary record, finding deficiencies that rendered the conviction untenable. Accordingly, the Court allowed the petitions and directed that necessary corrections be made to the records.
Issues considered
- Whether the factual and evidential material established the commission of waging war against the State under Section 121 IPC.
- Whether the procedural safeguards and due process were observed during the trial and appellate proceedings.
- Whether the conviction should be set aside or corrected through the Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 121
Subjects
Judgment
[2014] 14 S.C.R 185 ·
MD. JAMILUDINNASIR A
STATE OF WESTBENGAL .
(Criminal M. P. Nos. 3655-3656 of 2015)
h s·
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 1240-1241of2010)
APRIL 10, 2015
[SHIVA KIRTI SINGH AND
FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, JJ.]
c
Penal Code, 1860 - Waging of war against State -
Judgment dated 21.05.2014, reported in [2014] 14 SCR 1
and Order dated 10.10.2014, reported in [2014] 14SCR180
- Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions allowed.
CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal M. P. D
3655-3656 of 2015 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1240-1241 of
2010.
From the Judgment and Order dated 05.02.2010 of the
High Court at Calcutta in Death Reference 2 of 2005 in E
Sessions Case No. 79 of 2002 with CRA 428 of 2005.
Wl1H
Crl. M.P. Nos. 3653-3654 of 2015 in Criminal Appeal
Nos. 1242-1243 of 2010.
F
Ms. Manika Tripathy Pandey, Adv. for the Appellants.
Anip Sachthey, Saakaar Sardana, Advs. for the
Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was passed :
G
ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
H
185
186 . SUPREME COURT REP<?RTS· -.: [2014] 14 S.C.R.
-
A·.. 2. These Criminal Miscellaneous Retitions are allowed
'a'
in terms of prayer in these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions.
· Necessary
. . corrections may be .carried out accordingly.
' .
Nidhi Jain :'. · Crl.MPs allowed.
B
. ~' ; -
... - .(
' .. j
- ..
'..., ..... - .
..-- .
: ' - .- ••
.:;·:--:'} r: :.:1•r! r~;-"'~i~; :\'l~f- .~_:; 1
( ~ :. ,,.._; _:_~~;-::;;\:·-~ ~ ": : ; ,.:;3; (]_;:, "..7r~f f::;~.J •..:~~;~,)~,\-
·.;-,·.·- ..·.-- .,':'
/
; ..
}~ ~· ( .Jl ~:- : .. -. :: -·:::·. ~ ~:
(
~• : ----~
, , ,, ;. : ' '
>\
·:; . '•, I
... ; -, . ' l l
~ ,., ;
,) i ..· -~
~ ~- ~; -~: 7 j I, . '": ·:,.:-: L--.-· ·; :, . i~· • : .,, · ~: ·- ·: i 0-~ io C..... :: -:·; .'.,
I ;_, : :1.:
\ \
I
t
' ..
.:-rr·~ !:·~~-;::,_--· _.,~;1-:;t .'...·~:.:,,\;::-~:::.:..'~-.~::_,:_-·, !2- ~ · -~~ • ., ' -~
. '.
.
• 1-
_, '• ,.) -.. -
- .•• -- .
.. {, '. '
. ~ .
.
'
I' '
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.