LexRAMDEO CHAUHAN@ RAJ NATH versus STATE OF ASSAM
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
RAMDEO CHAUHAN@ RAJ NATH A STATE OF ASSAM MAY 10, 2001 [K.T. THOMAS, R.P. SETHI AND S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.] B Constitution of India, 1950-Art icle 13 7-Review-Scope of-In criminal cases-Held, the power is subject to the provisions of law made by parliament or any rules made under Article 145 of the Constitution-The mere Jae/ that two vie11's on the same su~ject are possible, is no ground to C review the earlier judgment passed by a Bench of the same strength-Civil_ Procedure Code, 1908-0rder XLVll Rule /-Supreme Court Rules, 1966- 0rder XL rules I & 5. Articles 72 and 161--Power to pardon-Held, the powers are absolute D and cannot be fettered by any statut01y provision-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 432, 433 and 433.4,. Penal Code, 1860-Section 302-Juvenile Justice Act, 1986-Section 22(1) & 8-Death sentence-Review of-On the ground of petitioner being juvenile on the relevant date-Plea raised for the first time-Petitioner not E proved to be juvenile on the relevant date-Held, the sentence cannot be altered-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 27. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ----., Sections 235 and 309(2) Third proviso (as amended) by Act 45 of F - 1978)-Adjournment of case-To enable the accused to show cause against the sentence proposed-Requirement of-Held, not required-Yet, in appropriate cases, the Court can grant adjournment, particularly if proposed sentence is sentence of death-Opportunity of hearing to the accused- Necessity of-Lego/ position reiterated and directions issued. Section 432-Remission of sentence-Held, does not mean aquittal, and does not amount to inte1ference with due and proper course of justice. Sections 433 & _433A-The power to commute a sentence of death is independent of Section 433A.-The restrictia11 under Section 433A of the 669 G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [200 I] 3 S. C.R. A Code comes into operation only after power under Section 433 is exercised. Criminal Trail-Age of the .accused-Determination of-Reliance on text books, medical jurisprudence and toxicology-Held, too much reliance cannot be placed on them-Evidence Act, 1872. B Words & Phrases-'Remit'-Meaning of-In the context of Section 432 Cr.P.C Against the judgment of Supreme Court confirming the death sentence awarded by the Trial Court and the High Court, petitioner has preferred the ',<___ C review petition. D The petitioner contended that he could not be sentenced in either imprisonment or death sentence, because he was a juvenile within the meaning of Section 2(h) of Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. Notice was issued on the limited point of sentence. The plea of the petitioner being juvenile was raised for the first time before this Court, and was not raised at the time of investigation, inquiry and trial, or in his application for grarit of bail, or in his confessional statement recorded by the Magistrate, or in the memo of appeal filed in the High Court. E Prosecution tried to establish that the petitioner was not a juvenile at F the relevant date on the basis of the supervision notes of the Superintendent of Police, the confessional statement of the petitioner, statement of the accused under Section 161 Cr.P.C., evidence of the father of the petitioner, the evidence of PW-4, and the sheet on which the statement of the accused was record~d by the trial Court under Section 235 Cr.P.C. The petitioner contended that the whole trial proceedings were liable to be quashed, as he could not have been tried by a court other than the juvenile court as per sections 23 and 24 of the Juvenile Justice Act; and that the trial court wrongly held that he was more than 20 years of age; and that G the evidence on record required re-examination as there were numerous inconsistencies and contradictions viz. as per the school admission register, the age of the petitioner was 11 months short of 16 years on the relevant date and as per the opinion of the radiological expert the petitioner was within the range of 20 and 21 years on the date of examination and as such r within 15 and 16 years on the relevant date; as the marginal error in age 1-t ascertained by· radiological examination is two years at either side, the \y--- R.D. CHAUHAN v. STATE OF ASSAM 671 benefit of which should go to the accused; and that the mandate of Section A 235 Cr.P.C., was violated as the judgment was pronounced on the same day when the conviction was recorded. As regards the necessity to afford o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.