Juvenile Justice Act, 2015: Though offences POCSO and Murder have been proved accused acquitted based on procedural illegalities
March 30, 2024
Challenge against the dismissal of criminal appeal by the Hon’ble High Court – Observation of the Trial court after the conviction – Child was not returned home from a shop and could not be traced hence fir registered – Victim (deceased) was last found with accused – Accused confessed and based on that dead body recovered and after post-mortem it is reported that it is homicide with injuries in the victim’s genitals – Accused was a child in conflict with law – Trial concluded in conviction – Mother of the accused filed petition praying the sentence may be reduced – Special court dismissed the petition – High Court dismissed the appeal = It is not disputed that the appellant was CICL (Child In Conflict with Law) because of the school record – As per section 9(1) Magistrate who is not empowered to exercise the power of board shall without any delay forward the child to board having jurisdiction – Though charge sheet was filed before the Special court it has no option except to forward the child to the concerned board for further directions – Procedure before the Board if the offence is heinous offence – Board has to decide whether the child to be tried as an adult by special court as per section 18(3) – As per section 19(1) Children’s court may further decide if there is a need for trial as an adult or not – Sections 15 and 19 are mandatory – Flagrant violation of not following mandatory requirements of sections 15 and 19 – Absence of preliminary assessment being conducted under sections 15(1) and 18(3) vitiates trial – Remanding back does not create any possibility to find out the mental and physical capacity of the accused.
Section 306 IPC: A casual remark that is likely to cause harassment in ordinary course of things does not constitute offence under section 306 IPC
March 30, 2024
Challenge against the dismissal of order under section 482 Cr.P.C – Deceased died due to non-vacation of his house by his brother (accused) – Quash petition filed after charge sheet was filed – Except the appellant told the deceased to go out and die there is no other allegations brought on record – Appellant was in USA and there is no material in record to show that any telephonic conversation occurred – Suicide notes did not give any evidence that the appellant was in touch with the deceased on telephone – A casual remark that is likely to cause harassment in ordinary course of things does not constitute offence under section 306 IPC.
When chief-examination of Prosecution witness is being recorded presence of accused advocate is required to object to a leading or irrelevant question being asked to the witness
March 30, 2024
Charge against the appellants are under sections 419, 420 of IPC and sections 66 read with 43 (j) and 66D of IT Act. Trial judge recorded 12 Prosecution witnesses Chief-examination without recording their cross-examination. Trial proceeded as per the direction of the Hon’ble Madras High court but appellants did not engage any advocate. Trial court ought to have provided legal aid advocate also the appellants did not decline to accept the service of legal aid lawyer. Presence of accused’s advocate is required when chief-examination of a material Prosecution witness is being recorded to object to a leading or irrelevant question being asked to the witness. Recording only the examination-in-chief without recording cross-examination is contrary to law. De novo trial directed again to examine the witnesses already examined.
CBI investigation: Only constitution courts are empowered to direct CBI Investigation
March 29, 2024
The cause of death of a young woman in Delhi remains a mystery in this complex legal case. After a legal battle the relatives of the young woman (deceased) obtained investigation by CBI.
Section 420 IPC: The contention that since charge sheet has been filed the present appeal is to be dismissed was rejected
March 24, 2024
Appeal against FIR dismissal seeks to quash case under Section 420 IPC. Apex court has held that there is no fraud, cheating, and criminal breach of trust allegations in this legal battle further quashed the case. Also Supreme court has insisted that if only civil remedy lies but criminal proceedings filed then the complainant must face the consequences.
Section 153A IPC: To constitute an offence under section 153A IPC words spoken or written must create enmity between different groups
March 22, 2024
Appellant challenges High Court order on FIR No. 31 of 2020, involving Sections 153A, 500, 501, 504, 34 & 120B IPC. Hon’ble Supreme Court has quashed the FIR stating that there is no allegation to constitute offences under section 154A IPC and other IPC offences.
Circumstantial evidence: Merely appellants were seen nearby the place where the crime occurred holding chopper is not last seen
March 22, 2024
Circumstantial evidence: Merely appellants were seen nearby the place where the crime occurred holding chopper is not last seen. General principles regarding the innocence of accused. Witness did not say that the accused were seen nearby the dead body. Recovery is from open place accessible to one and all. Accused aquitted.
Suicide: No dowry demand: A moral conviction regarding the guilt of an individual has no place in criminal jurisprudence
March 21, 2024
Prayer Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. for setting aside a judgment. Accused acquitted of dowry death charges. The accused was prosecuted for dowry harassment upon his wife. she has committed suicide and thereby caused dowry death. Fact of the case is after a year of their marriage the appellant started constructing a house for which he demanded the jewels of his wife but the deceased refused to act upon the appellant’s wish. When P.W.1 (deceased mother) went to a private hospital the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. P.W’1 has heard the loud cry of the appellant/accused calling the name of the deceased. P.w.1 has preferred a complaint. Trial court after considering the prosecution witnesses and the documents convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him under sections 498A and 304B IPC but acquitted him from the offence u/s 306 IPC. Appeal court (Hon’ble Madras High Court) convinced that requesting his wife to give her jewels is for construction house that too after some years of marriage which is not in connection with the marriage. Further Madras High Court has held that the demand is only for advancing their life and such demand cannot be termed as dowry and set aside the order of conviction. MHC when acquitting the accused/appellant has further held that a moral conviction regarding the guilt of an individual has no place in criminal jurisprudence.
AADHAAR Act: Furnishing of details to ascertain whether AADHAAR is genuine or not does in the interest of national security is permitted
March 21, 2024
The Aadhaar Act allows for the disclosure of information in the interest of national security. This petition seeks details to verify the genuineness of Aadhaar cards for a criminal investigation which is allowed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court (principal bench)
TIP: Dock identification for the first time in the absence of proper identification parade is doubtful
March 21, 2024
The conviction under section 397 r/w 395 IPC is challenged due to the lack of proper identification parade and dock identification for the first time. Hon’ble Supreme Court accepted the contention challenged and acquitted the accused.
N.I Act: s. 143A N.I Act: How and when to direct Interim compensation is explained
March 20, 2024
The application under Section 143A of the NI Act aims to add interim compensation to the accused’s plea. Section 143A(1) applies after the accused’s plea is recorded, while Section 143A(1)(b) applies only to warrant cases. Interim compensation can be recovered as a fine under section 421 Cr.P.C. The appellate court can exercise discretion in directing payment. This case is remanded back to the trial court for fresh considerations based on the directions given in this judgment.
Section 173(2) Cr.P.C: Direction: Apex court directed the police officers to comply with the mandatory details to be submitted with the final report
March 18, 2024
In this appeal, the appellant challenges the High Court’s decision of dismissing his bail application. The Hon’ble Supreme court has called for details on charge sheet filed. After reviewing the chargesheet, it lacks necessary details, therefore, Apex court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP) of Jharkhand will ensure and take necessary steps to comply with appropriate law laid down u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. Apex court directed the police officers to comply with the mandatory details to be submitted with the final report.
Voluntary Surrender before non-jurisdictional Magistrate: My candid opinion dedicated (surrender) to His Lordship _by Ramprakash Rajagopal, Advocate.
March 17, 2024
Explore the legal issues and answers surrounding the Ayyappan vs state judgment in 2015, including provisions for surrender and arrest under the Cr. P. C.
Sentence modified into section 304 part II: Deceased died when appellant fired in the open sky in a marriage ceremony though unfortunate but having no enmity and intention
March 12, 2024
Section 304 Part II deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder. In this case, the deceased tragically lost his life when the appellant, without any malice or premeditation, fired a gunshot into the sky during a joyous wedding ceremony. Hon’ble Supreme court has concluded that though it is cruel act but without any intention or enmity and modified the sentence.
Section 451 / 457 Cr.P.C: Return of Property: There is no bar to release the property in NDPS Act
March 11, 2024
After reviewing the submissions, it is confirmed that the petitioner is the vehicle owner and not involved in the case. The vehicle was rented out to A1/Balamurugan, with no contraband found. Due to the vehicle being exposed to weather since seizure, further detention could damage it. Citing the Apex Court’s decision in a similar case, the Court is inclined to allow return of the vehicle, despite objections from the Additional Public Prosecutor.
Section 91 Cr.P.C: Accused has no right to summon call at the stage of charge framing
March 11, 2024
Appeal against High Court order on summoning call details during criminal proceedings in Rajasthan. Accused’s application rejected by Trial Court, allowed by High Court. Important legal implications discussed.
WhatsApp status: Criticizing abrogation of Article 370 in J&K is protected under freedom of speech (Article 19(1)(a)) and does not violate section 153A IPC
March 9, 2024
The expression of speech through a WhatsApp status criticizing certain actions does not necessarily attract offence under section 153A of the IPC.
Title: Understanding Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC): Criminal Conspiracy and its Implications
March 9, 2024
Explore the significance of Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code in addressing criminal conspiracies and its implications on the legal landscape.
Case diary: Section 172(3) Cr.P.C: The accused has a right to cross-examine police officer as per section 145 Evidence Act whenever the police officer uses it to refresh his memory
March 8, 2024
Trial court placed burden on accused regarding case diary corrections, Missing pages. Convicted under section 302 IPC, seeks acquittal after confirmation by High Court.
Custody of child in Mohammaden Law: No system of adoption of child in Mohammaden law: Custody of children is the welfare of children and not the right of their parents
March 8, 2024
Against the order passed by the Hisgh Court in a Writ Petition- No system of adoption of child in Mohammaden law. It is only Kafalah, in terms of which only custody can be given to another person, however, the child does not sever relations with biological parents – custody of a minor child in parens patriae jurisdiction – Time gap shows that the respondent No. 2 is not interested in custody of the child – Custody of the child cannot be given to the stranger- the custody of children is the welfare of children and not the right of their parents- when custody of the child was handed over to her, was un-married and is now married having two children will also not be a deterrent – the conclusion that best interest of the child still remains with the appellant No. 2 – Stability of the child is also of paramount consideration- appeal is accordingly allowed.
Surrender petition: Accused should surrender only before the Jurisdictional Magistrate
March 8, 2024
Unless the case diary and the remand report is transmitted to the Magistrate he would not be able to apply his mind effectively for remand – Practice for decade surrendering before non-jurisdictional Magistrates is strange and dubious practice and severely deprecated – Roshan Beevi vs. Joint secretary (1983 MLW (cri) 289) cannot be applied to IPC offences – Remand would be effected even the Magistrate has no jurisdiction.
Section 203 Cr.P.C: Dismissal of complaint: Cause of action for filing complaint is same as is in the filing contempt petition and that fact was not mentioned in the complaint and hence taking cognizance is abuse of process of law
March 7, 2024
Section 203 Cr.P.C: Dismissal of complaint: Cause of action for filing complaint is same as is in the filing contempt petition and that fact was not mentioned in the complaint and hence taking cognizance is abuse of process of law.
NDPS Act: Confession to the police officer is not admissible and hit under section 25 Evidence Act
March 6, 2024
Challenge – Conviction under NDPS Act – Brief Facts – Arrest and interrogation on the spot – Recovered contraband is Ganja – Trial court convicted – High court upheld the conviction – Analysis: Recovery of narcotics from vehicle stopped during transit – Independent panch witnesses not examined – No witnesses or documents to prove the safe keeping of samples – Inventory proceedings were not prepared in the presence of the Jurisdictional Magistrate as per section 52A NDPS Act – Confession to the police officer is not admissible and hit under section 25 Evidence Act – Prosecution failed to prove the charges.
Automatic vacation of stay: Asian Resurfacing judgment resurfaced
March 6, 2024
A Miscellaneous Application was filed in the decided case, in light of the order passed on 4th December 2019 by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pune. When the learned Magistrate was called upon to proceed with the trial on the ground of automatic vacation of stay after the expiry of a period of six months, the learned Magistrate expressed a view that when the jurisdictional High Court had passed an order of stay, a Court subordinate to the High Court cannot pass any order contrary to the order of stay. By the order dated 15th October 2020, this Court held that when the stay granted by the High Court automatically expires, unless an extension is granted for good reasons, the Trial Court, on expiry of a period of six months, must set a date for trial and go ahead with the same. Later, an attempt was made to seek clarification of the law laid down in the case of Asian Resurfacing [(2018) 16 SCC 299]. This Court, by the order dated 25th April 2022, did not apply the direction issued in Asian Resurfacing to the facts of the case before it. An attempt was made to apply the directions to an order of stay of the order of the learned Single Judge of the High Court passed by a Division Bench in a Letters Patent Appeal. Hence reference to Larger bench and the same was decided by Constitution bench and held the Asian Resurfacing case as per in curium.
