Case Details

Citation(s)
1957 SLG 166 1957 SLD 166 = 1957 PLD 30
Supreme Court of India
Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 1955, decided on 3rd Novem ber 1955.
Present: Bhagwati, Venkatarama Ayyar and Sinha, JJ
Ch. Hyder Hussain, Senior Advocate (Jagdish Chandra, Advocate with him) for Appellant.   M. B. Asthana and C. P. Lal, Advocates for
Respondent.

SUNDAR SINGH-Appellant

VERSUS

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH-Respondent

Law: Constitution of India

Section: 134 (1) (c), 136 (1)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 103

  P L D 1957 Supreme Court (Ind.) 30         (a) Constitution of India-----   ---Article 134 (1) (c) (Constitution of Pakistan, Article 159 (c)-Affirming judgment not involving any difficult questions of law or principle-No justification for High Court to certify the case as fit for appeal.   The grant of a certificate under Article 134 (1) (c) is not a matter of course but that power has to be exercised after considering what difficult questions of law or principle were involved in the case which should require the further consider ation of the Supreme Court.   The word "certifies" in sub-Article (1) (c) is a strong word which requires the High Court to look closely into the case to see if any special consideration arise. If a case does not involve any question of law, then however difficult the question of fact may be, that would not justify the grant of a certificate under Article 134 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India (Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 159 (c)) because if the High Court has any doubt about the facts of a criminal case, the benefit of that doubt must go to the accused.   If on the other hand, the High Court has no doubt about the guilt of the accused and confirms the order of conviction passed by the trial Court, ordinarily there could be no ground for entertaining an application for a certificate that the case was a fit one for further appeal to the Supreme Court.   Where the High Court has reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death or where it has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any Court subordinate to it and has convicted an accused person and sentenced him to death, those cases would be covered by the provisions respectively of Articles 134 (1) (a) and 134 (b) of the Constitution of India.   Ordinarily, therefore, in a case which does not involve a substantial question of law or principle in an affirming judg ment, the High Court would not be justified in granting a certificate under sub-article (c) of Article 134 (1) of the Constitution of India.   Nar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh A I R 1954 S C 457 foll.  …
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register