Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 58

Views favouring limitation in a modified form

3.6. Limitation of the scope of appeals under Article 134 but in a modified form has been favoured in some of the replies received by us. For example, there is a suggestion1 that in every case where the sentence of death is awarded, there should be a right of appeal, besides cases where a substantial question of law of general importance is involved. Another suggestion2 is that in every case of life imprisonment, appeal be allowed.

Then, there is a suggestion3 that clause (c) of'Article 134(1), should be totally deleted, since Article 136 serves well the purposes intended to be achieved by Article 134(1)(c). Some of the replies4 while not favouring a change in Article 134, express the view that the parliamentary legislation5 passed under Article 134(2) should be repealed. In addition, several Judges and members of the bar have, in oral discussions, expressed their views on various aspects of the question. We now proceed to deal with the present position, and the question whether an amendment is needed.

1. S. No. 19.

2. Oral discussions (Madras Bar).

3. S. No. 41 (a High Court Judge).

4. S. No. 36 (four Judges of a High Court).

5. The Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act: 1970.

Structure and Jurisdiction of the Higher Judiciary Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
Powered and driven by Neosys Inc