Criminal Trial

Ravinder Kumar vs State Of NCT Of Delhi 2024 INSC 211 – Ss 27,106 Evidence Act – Circumstantial Evidence

Indian Evidence Act, 1872; Section 27 – For a recovery to be admissible on the statement made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, it has to be from such a place which is exclusively within the knowledge of the maker thereof. When (1) the recovery is from a place accessible to one and all …

Ravinder Kumar vs State Of NCT Of Delhi 2024 INSC 211 – Ss 27,106 Evidence Act – Circumstantial Evidence Read More »

Navas @ Mulanavas vs State Of Kerala 2024 INSC 215 – Criminal Trial – Sentencing – S 106 Evidence Act

Criminal Trial -Sentencing – In the process of arriving at the number of years which the convict will have to undergo before which the remission powers could be invoked, some of the relevant factors that the courts bear in mind are:- (a) the number of deceased who are victims of that crime and their age …

Navas @ Mulanavas vs State Of Kerala 2024 INSC 215 – Criminal Trial – Sentencing – S 106 Evidence Act Read More »

Periyasamy vs State 2024 INSC 212 – Right To Private Difference – Criminal Trial – Independent Witness

Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 96-106- Right To Private Defence – (i) Self-preservation is the basic human instinct and is duly recognised by the criminal jurisprudence of all civilised countries. All free, democratic and civilised countries recognise the right of private defence within certain reasonable limits. (ii) The right of private defence is available only …

Periyasamy vs State 2024 INSC 212 – Right To Private Difference – Criminal Trial – Independent Witness Read More »

Thakore Umedsing Nathusing vs State Of Gujarat 2024 INSC 198 – Criminal Trial- Circumstantial Evidence- Appeal Against Acquittal- S 25 Evidence Act

Criminal Trial – Circumstantial Evidence – The principles required to bring home the charges in a case based purely on circumstantial evidence have been crystalized in the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC 116 – “(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn must …

Thakore Umedsing Nathusing vs State Of Gujarat 2024 INSC 198 – Criminal Trial- Circumstantial Evidence- Appeal Against Acquittal- S 25 Evidence Act Read More »

Nirmal Premkumar vs State 2024 INSC 193 – POCSO Accused Acquitted

Criminal Trial – Sexual Offences – Weight to be attached to the testimony of the victim in matters involving sexual offences where the prosecution’s case hinges on the victim’s evidence—in cases where witnesses are neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable, the Court should strive to find out the true genesis of the incident. The Court …

Nirmal Premkumar vs State 2024 INSC 193 – POCSO Accused Acquitted Read More »

State of Punjab vs Gurpreet Singh 2024 INSC 154 – Article 136 Constitution – Criminal Appeal – Close Relative Witness – FIR

Constitution of India, 1950; Article 136 – Criminal Appeal – Once the appellate court acquits the accused, the presumption of innocence as it existed before conviction by the Trial Court, stands restored, and this Court, while scrutinizing the evidence, will proceed with great circumspect and will not routinely interfere with an order of acquittal, save …

State of Punjab vs Gurpreet Singh 2024 INSC 154 – Article 136 Constitution – Criminal Appeal – Close Relative Witness – FIR Read More »

Ram Singh vs State Of UP 2024 INSC 128 :: [2024] 2 S.C.R. 668 – Criminal Trial – Non Recovery Of Weapon

Criminal Trial – non-recovery of the weapon of crime- By itself non-recovery of the weapon of crime would not be fatal to the prosecution case. When there is such non-recovery, there would be no question of linking the empty cartridges and pellets seized during investigation with the weapon allegedly used in the crime. Obtaining of …

Ram Singh vs State Of UP 2024 INSC 128 :: [2024] 2 S.C.R. 668 – Criminal Trial – Non Recovery Of Weapon Read More »

Kalinga @ Kushal vs State Of Karnataka 2024 INSC 124 :: [2024] 2 S.C.R. 391 – Extra Judicial Confession – Appeal Against Acquittal- Circumstantial Evidence

Criminal Trial – Extra Judicial Confession – A weak type of evidence and is generally used as a corroborative link to lend credibility to the other evidence on record – Extra judicial confession must be accepted with great care and caution. If it is not supported by other evidence on record, it fails to inspire …

Kalinga @ Kushal vs State Of Karnataka 2024 INSC 124 :: [2024] 2 S.C.R. 391 – Extra Judicial Confession – Appeal Against Acquittal- Circumstantial Evidence Read More »

Palani vs Tamil Nadu State 2024 INSC 110 – Drugs and Cosmetics Act

Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940; Section 18A ,28 – Both these provisions concern the disclosure or non-disclosure respectively of the name of the manufacturer – In this case, the quantities of the 29 kinds of medicines recovered from the clinic run by the Appellant, were of small quantity. In such a situation, non-disclosure of the …

Palani vs Tamil Nadu State 2024 INSC 110 – Drugs and Cosmetics Act Read More »