Criminal Procedure Code

Ranjeet Mittal vs State Of Madhya Pradesh 2024 INSC 766 – S 482 CrPC – Quashing Of Criminal Charges

Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 – Section 482 -For quashing of criminal charges it must be shown that there is no sufficient evidence to prove a prima facie case against the accused person/s. [In this case, there are statements by witnesses indicating abuse and torture of deceased by her in-laws and other factual circumstances- Therefore …

Ranjeet Mittal vs State Of Madhya Pradesh 2024 INSC 766 – S 482 CrPC – Quashing Of Criminal Charges Read More »

Shivkumar Ramsundar Saket vs State Of Maharashtra 2024 INSc 759 -Murder Case- Death Sentence Set Aside

Summary: Trial Judge did not impose death penalty holding that it does not fit in the category of ‘rarest of rare cases’ – High Court imposed death penalty in appeal – Partly allowing appeal, SC observed: Unless the finding recorded by the Trial Judge was found to be perverse or impossible, the High Court ought …

Shivkumar Ramsundar Saket vs State Of Maharashtra 2024 INSc 759 -Murder Case- Death Sentence Set Aside Read More »

Rama Devi vs State Of Bihar 2024 INSC 755 – Delay In Forwarding FIR – S. 161 Statements

Code of Criminal Procedure ,1973- Section 154– When there is a delay in forwarding the FIR to the jurisdictional magistrate and the accused raises a specific contention regarding the same, they must demonstrate how this delay has prejudiced their case. Mere delay by itself is not sufficient to discard and disbelieve the case of the …

Rama Devi vs State Of Bihar 2024 INSC 755 – Delay In Forwarding FIR – S. 161 Statements Read More »

K Vadivel vs K Shanthi 2024 INSC 746 – CrPC – Further Investigation – Speedy Justice –

Code Of Criminal Procedure,1973; Section 173(8)- Where fresh materials come to light which would implicate persons not previously accused or absolve persons already accused or where it comes to the notice of the investigating agency that a person already accused of an offence has a good alibi, it may be the duty of the investigating …

K Vadivel vs K Shanthi 2024 INSC 746 – CrPC – Further Investigation – Speedy Justice – Read More »

Baljinder Singh @ Ladoo vs State Of Punjab 2024 INSC 738 – S 34,149 IPC – Ss 464 CrPC –

Indian Penal Code,1860; Section 34 [BNS 2023; Section 3(5)]– There cannot be a fixed timeframe for formation of common intention. It is not essential for the perpetrators to have had prior meetings to conspire or make preparations for the crime. Common intention to commit murder can arise even moments before the commission of the act. …

Baljinder Singh @ Ladoo vs State Of Punjab 2024 INSC 738 – S 34,149 IPC – Ss 464 CrPC – Read More »

Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel vs State Of Maharashtra 2024 INSC 737 – S 482 CrPC

Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 482-There is no prohibition against quashing of the criminal proceedings even after the charge sheet has been filed.- Referred to Anand Kumar Mohatta v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2019) 11 SCC 706. (Para 16) Summary: High Court refused to quash the FIR- Allowing appeal, SC observed: The provocation for …

Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel vs State Of Maharashtra 2024 INSC 737 – S 482 CrPC Read More »

Vijay Singh @ Vijay Kr. Sharma vs State Of Bihar 2024 INSC 735 & 759 – Criminal Trial – Appeal Against Acquittal – Murder Conviction Set Aside

Criminal Trial -A post mortem report is generally not considered as conclusive evidence of the facts mentioned in the re-port regarding the cause of death, time of death etc. It could always be corroborated with other direct evidence on record such as ocular evidence of the eye witnesses. However, when there is no other credible …

Vijay Singh @ Vijay Kr. Sharma vs State Of Bihar 2024 INSC 735 & 759 – Criminal Trial – Appeal Against Acquittal – Murder Conviction Set Aside Read More »

Santosh @ Rajesh @ Gopal vs State Of Madhya Pradesh 2024 INSC 723 – S 27 Evidence Act

Indian Evidence Act,1872; Section 27 [BSA,2023; Section 23(2)]- The word,“distinctly” used in Section 27 relates to the discovered fact. Only that much which relates to the discovery of a physical object is admissible. The rest of the testimony is to be excluded. The facts proved by the prosecution, particularly the admissible portion of the statement …

Santosh @ Rajesh @ Gopal vs State Of Madhya Pradesh 2024 INSC 723 – S 27 Evidence Act Read More »

Just Rights For Children Alliance vs S Harish 2024 INSC 716 – POCSO – IT Act – Child Pornography

POCSO Act, 2012; Section 15– Wherever a person indulges in any activity such as viewing, distributing or displaying etc. pertaining to any child pornographic material without actually possessing or storing it in any device or in any form or manner, such act would still tantamount to ‘possession’ in terms of Section 15 of the POCSO, …

Just Rights For Children Alliance vs S Harish 2024 INSC 716 – POCSO – IT Act – Child Pornography Read More »