Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Case title

Md. Alfaz Ali v State of Assam

Key takeaways

  • This case was heard by the bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai.
  • In case of Naib Singh vs State of Punjab and other three cases the judgement held that the imprisonment for life shall be equated with the rigorous imprisonment.

Background of case

  • Md. Abdul Jalil, son of Kalu khan filed a complaint in the police station of Jogighopa, alleging that his daughter was killed by the petitioner, who was her husband.
  • The petitioner was convicted under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment.
  • The petitioner filed an appeal in the High Court challenging the sentence of conviction but the High Court dismissed the appeal.
  • Then the special leave petition was filed.
  • The learned counsel for the State informed the court that the petitioner was released for 30 days but the petitioner did not surrender after the expiry of the leave. Then FIR was lodged and after some days the petitioner surrendered himself and he was sentenced for imprisonment of nine years till date.

Special leave petition

  • The petitioner filed the special leave petition against the order of conviction and the dismissal of the appeal by the High Court.
  • The prosecution claimed that the petitioner killed his wife as he suspected infidelity.
  • It was observed by the bench that the issue was settled in the case of Naib Singh vs State of Punjab and ors.
  • In Naib Singh vs State of Punjab and ors case the petitioner was convicted under section 302 of Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced for life imprisonment and after 22 years of serving the punishment he filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the remaining detention. The petitioner claimed that the sentence of life imprisonment shall not be equated with rigorous imprisonment.
  • While considering other case laws i.e.,Pandit Kishore Lal vs King Emperor and Gopal Vinayak Godse vs State of Maharashtra, the Court in Naib’s case held that the sentence of life imprisonment shall be equated with rigorous imprisonment.
  • This was also held in the case of Dilpesh Balchandra Panchal vs State of Gujarat, Sat Pal alias Sadhu v. State of Haryana and Mohd. Munna v. Union of India.

Observation of court

According to the Court, there was no need to re-examine the points in the notice which were issued. Therefore, the appeal for special leave petition was dismissed by the court.

Hope you find the snippet informative.

1) Is it the right decision to equate the life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment?
2) What is Article 32 of Indian Constitution?

"Loved reading this piece by Anusha Singh?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Tags :

  Views  27  Report

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query