Criminal Law

Based on the principles on discharge under Section 227 of the   Cr.P.C, in Dipakbhai   Jagdishchandra   Patel v.  State   of Gujarat (2019) 16 SCC 547, this Court recapitulated “…23. … All that   is required is, the court must be satisfied that with the materials available, a case is made out for the accused to stand trial… Strong suspicion must be the   […]

The investigating agencies and their officers are duty-bound to comply with the mandate of Section 41 and 41A of the Code and the directions issued in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 – Any dereliction on their part has to be brought to the notice of the higher authorities by the

Expressions “touches” or “touch” in first part of S. 7, and, “physical contact” in second part of S. 7, cannot be construed as “skin-to-skin” contact. The most important ingredient for constituting offence of “sexual assault” under S. 7 is “sexual intent” and not “skin-to-skin” contact. Crucially, neither S. 7 nor any other provision of the

Recognizes protection of victim’s right — Right of victim or their near and dear ones to seek enhancement of sentence: Victim’s right (including that of victim’s relations, heir or guardian), is a facet of human rights, a substantive and enforceable right and deserves equal regard. Criminal cannot be treated leniently solely on the ground of discretion

The High Court has not assigned reasons for the grant of bail to the respondents ­accused and has granted bail by a cryptic order de hors any reasoning. However, the Court deciding a bail application cannot completely divorce its decision from material aspects of the case such as the allegations made against the accused; severity

Forum shopping: Two simultaneous proceedings, arising from same cause of action were initiated by the Respondent amounting to abuse of process of law which is barred. Held, Forum shopping has been termed as disreputable practice by courts and has no sanction in law. Multiple complaints by same party against same accused in respect of same

It could thus be seen that this Court in its celebrated judgment in the case of Vadivelu Thevarhas found that witnesses are of three types, viz., (a) wholly reliable; (b) wholly unreliable; and (c) neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. When the witness is “wholly reliable”, the Court should not have any difficulty inasmuch as

During the course of the investigation, it has been revealed that husband took the accidental insurance policy jointly with his wife on 29.09.2020 of Rs. 60 lakhs. The date of the offence is 26.12.2020 at 7:00 a.m. During the course of the investigation and from the call details, it has been revealed that husband was

Application under S. 156(3) CrPC without affidavit duly sworn by complainant cannot be entertained by Magistrate. When complaint was not supported by affidavit, magistrate oght not to have entertained application under S. 156(3) CrPC. High Court also failed to take into consideration legal position enunciated by SC in Priyanka Srivastava (2015) 6 SCC 287, and

Requirement of giving reasons for the decision is of the essence and is virtually a part of “due process”. Clarified, however, that while the court is not required to give elaborate reasons while granting bail, an order dehors any reasoning whatsoever cannot result in grant of bail. Where the accused summoned under sec 319 of