• Jamiluddin Nasir Vs. State of West Bengal

  • Citation: Jamiluddin Nasir v. State of West Bengal, Criminal Appeal No(S). 1240-1241/2010, Judgment Dated- 21/05/2014, Bench- A.K. Patnaik & Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, JJ, 2014 AIR(SC) 2587: 2014(7) SCC 443: 2014(7) SCALE 571: 2014(5) Supreme 135: 2014(5) SLT 588: 2014 CrLJ 3589: 2014(3) SCC(Cr) 230: 2014(3) Crimes 335(SC).

    Head Notes

    Appeal Against Conviction -Offences Against The State- Chapter- VI- Sections-121 To 130 Of IPC- Penal Code, 1860- Sections 120-B, 121, 121-A, 122, 302, 307, 333, 467, 468 & 471- Applicability of- Scope - Sentence- Quantum of, general principles for awarding sentence in cases relating to conspiracy for Waging War Against The State– Discussed (Para 138)-HELD- We can cull out the following general principles to be applied:- a) The most important is the intention and purpose behind the defiance or raging against the government.- b) Though the modus operandi of preparing for the offensive act against the government may be quite akin to the preparation in a regular war, it is often said that the number of force, the manner in which they are arrayed, the arm and or equipments are immaterial.- c) Even a limited number of persons who carry powerful explosives and missiles without regard to their own safety can cause more devastating damage than a large group of persons armed with ordinary weapons or firearms.- d) There need not be the pomp or pageantry usually associated with war such as the offenders forming themselves in battle line and arraying in a war-like manner.- e) The Court must be cautious in adopting an approach which has the effect of bringing within the fold of Section 121 all acts of lawless near and violent acts resulting in destruction of public property, etc.- f) The moment it is found that the object sought to be attained is of a great public nature or has a political hue the offensive violent act targeted against the armed force and public officials should not be branded as acts of `waging war'.- g) The expression `waging war` should not be stretched too far to hold that all acts of disrupting public order and peace irrespective of their magnitude and repercussions could be reckoned as acts of `waging war' against the government.- h) A balanced and realistic approach is called in construing the expression `waging war' irrespective of how it was viewed in the long long past.- i) An organized movement attended with violence and attacks against the public officials and armed forces while agitating for the repeal of an unpopular law or for preventing burdensome taxes were viewed as acts of treason in the form of `waging war'.- j) Neither the number engaged nor the force employed nor the species of weapon with which they may be armed is really material to prove the offence of waging war.- k) The single most important factor should be to think that in a case that is being considered of waging or attempting to wage war against the Government of India, what is the target of attack chosen by the conspirators and the immediate objective sought to be achieved thereby.- l) The planned operations if executed what is the extent of disaster spelt out to the whole nation. Whether a war like situation lingering for days or weeks would have prevailed and such offensive acts of unimaginable description and devastation would have posed a challenge to the government and the democratic institutions for the protection of which the government of the day stands.- m) Was it mere desperate act of a small group of persons who were sure to meet with death is to ignore the obvious realities and to stultify the wider connotation of the expression of war chosen by the drafters of IPC.- n) The undoubted objective and the determination of the offenders was it to impinge on the sovereign authority of the nation and its government.- Death sentence- Conversion of, to life imprisonment, scope- Material revealed that under an impression that the Government of India was not taking proper care of Muslims, accused persons hatched conspiracy to teach a lesson to the Indian Government- Two of the accused persons came on the spot on a motorcycle, and one of them indiscriminately fired with AK-47 rifle at police personnel at American Centre -- Same resulted in five deaths and many injured -- Role of appellant i.e. the main accused behind hatching conspiracy found to be of very high magnitude, but the role of second appellant found to be slightly lesser in degree as compared to that of appellant main accused -- Resultantly, the appellant main accused sentenced for life for the entirety of his life and the second appellant sentenced with a life imprisonment for a minimum period of 30 years.- Goal Vinita Gods vs. The State of Maharashtra and others, AIR 1961 SC 600, Sander vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2012) 6 SCC 107, & Mohandas Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2013) 3 SCC 294, Relied on.- State (NCT of Delhi) vs. Navjot Sandhu @ Afsan Guru, (2005) 11 SCC 600, Mohammed Jamal Mohammad Air Kasbah @ Abu Mohair vs. State of Maharashtra (2012) 9 SCC 1 & Mohr. Arid @ Ashram vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 13 SCC 621, Distinguished (Paras 155 to 158).

    Kindly CLICK HERE or e-mail us at office@hellocounsel.com if you are facing any Legal Issue and want to have Legal Consultations with the empanelled Lawyers at Hello Counsel. 




All original content on these pages is fingerprinted and certified by Digiprove