PRATAP versus STATE OF U.P.

PRATAP versus STATE OF U.P.

Majority held that the accused was under a sentence of life imprisonment when he committed the second murder; s. 303 IPC applied, making death sentence compulsory; High Court's procedure was not illegal as notice for enhancement was given; framing a separate charge or full retrial was not mandatory since facts were established and accused had opportunity to defend.

Parties
Appellant: Pratap; Respondent: State of U.P.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 December 1972
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Certificate From High Court Judgment Enhancing Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Revisional Jurisdiction, Enhanced Punishment, Procedure for Framing Charges
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Revisional Jurisdiction Enhanced Punishment Procedure for Framing Charges

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pratap

Appellant

State of U.P.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Certificate From High Court Judgment Enhancing Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant was liable to be sentenced under s. 303 IPC for murder committed while under a sentence of life imprisonment
  2. 2 Whether procedure under s. 310 Cr.P.C. must be followed before imposing enhanced punishment under s. 303 IPC
  3. 3 Whether the High Court could impose enhanced punishment of death on basis of revision petitions by a private party without appeal by the State

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that the accused was under a sentence of life imprisonment when he committed the second murder; s. 303 IPC applied, making death sentence compulsory; High Court's procedure was not illegal as notice for enhancement was given; framing a separate charge or full retrial was not mandatory since facts were established and accused had opportunity to defend.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction and sentence under s. 303 IPC affirmed by majority; dissent would quash the death sentence and restore life imprisonment