http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7
PETITIONER: KARNAIL SINGH AND ANOTHER
Vs.
RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF PUNJAB.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/01/1953
BENCH: AIYYAR, T.L. VENKATARAMA BENCH: AIYYAR, T.L. VENKATARAMA BHAGWATI, NATWARLAL H. JAGANNADHADAS, B.
CITATION: 1954 AIR 204 1954 SCR 904 CITATOR INFO : D 1955 SC 274 (11) RF 1956 SC 116 (49,77) R 1956 SC 238 (7) R 1956 SC 546 (5) C 1965 SC 328 (9) F 1973 SC2221 (12) F 1990 SC1982 (3)
ACT: Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), ss. 34 and 149-Scope of-Charge under s. 302 read with s. 149-Conviction under s. 302 read with s. 34-Whether valid.
HEADNOTE: It was contended that the conviction of the appellants under s. 302, Indian Penal Code, read with s. 34 was illegal when they had been charged only under s. 302 read with s. 149 because the scope of s. 149 was different from that of s. 34, that while what s. 149 required was proof of a common object, it would be necessary under s. 34 to establish a common intention and that therefore when the charge against the accused was under s. 149, it could not be converted in appeal into one under s. 34. Held, that it is true that there is ’substantial difference between the two sections but they also to some extent overlap and it is a question to be determined on the facts of each case whether the charge under s. 149 overlaps the ground...