Sathiyajyothi Sabapathi

Follow:
12 Articles
Cr.P.C

Inordinate Delay in Serving Summons Cannot Quash Criminal Proceedings After Charges are Framed: Madras HC

Cr.P.C

Sivakumar vs State: Mere Use of the Word ‘Bastard’ is Not an Offence Under Section 294(b) IPC

General

Surrogacy Act: Magistrates Cannot Reassess Eligibility Certificates; Age Limit of “50 Years” Includes the Entire 50th Year: Madras High Court

BNSS

Section 156(3) CrPC: Mere existence of a civil remedy does not by itself bar criminal proceedings If Allegations prima-facie disclose a cognizable offence

domestic violence
Acquittal

Supreme Court again discouraging DV Act proceedings after a valid divorce compromise

Evidence

Prosecution has proved the case through hostile witness

General

The facts of the present case can be brought under exception I of Section 300 of IPC and thus is punishable u/s. 304(I) of IPC and not u/s. 302 of IPC

Latest

POCSO: Victim’s testimony before the Court is clear and cogent and almost the same as per the statement recorded u/s. 164 Cr.P.C and there has been no exaggeration or any inconsistency

General

Madras High Court Quashed: Section 69 and 351(2) BNS: Distinction between a promise to marry and a mere breach of promise due to later circumstances explained.

Cr.P.C

Hon’ble Madras High Court suggests the need for structured and digital handling practices for e-filing of final report by district registry staff and police

jegan
ad. Jegan

Remedy and Challenges after the order of the Magistrate for FIR Direction

Corruption Laws

Madras High Court: 14% of the disproportionate assets is inconsistent with the known sources of income thus conviction upheld