Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The prosecution had raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition contending that the Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 puts an embargo on the High Court from hearing any anticipatory bail application.
The accused, who was a bus driver, was obligated to sound the horn, wait a reasonable period, or seek assistance from the conductor before moving the bus. Failure to adopt such precautions constituted negligence as a public bus driver.
The case was pending before the Magistrate for almost 10 years, but during that entire period, the petitioner did not make any effort to examine the allottee as a witness. This clearly showed lack of due diligence by the petitioner during the trial before the Magistrate.
“The prosecution had examined only 27 witnesses by 11-8-2025 out of 170 witnesses cited by it. Thus, the possibility of concluding of the trial in the near future appeared remote while the accused had already served more than a decade in prison.”
Witness Protection Scheme is a remedial and curative measure, designed to neutralise the effects of threats once they have materialised. Bail cancellation, on the other hand, is a preventive and supervisory function of the criminal court, whose duty is to ensure that the trial proceeds unpolluted by intimidation.
In the case at hand, the convict and the co-accused had kidnapped the minor girl on their bike and raped her in the jungle. The convict had been apprehended but the co-accused had managed to escape.
The police under oath stated that the petitioner was informed the reasons of arrest by giving it in writing on a sheet of paper, but the fact that no such sheet of paper was ever served to the petitioner, and a completely false statement was made by the authorities, shocked the conscience of the Court.
“Making statements such as, the wife does not wear proper clothes or was not able to cook food properly, cannot be said to be acts of grave cruelty or harassment as per the explanations given in Section 498-A of the Penal Code, 1860.”
The Court observed that the accused persons are not just normal employees but participated in misbranding of the controlled substance as normal drug. They have also actively assisted their employer in transporting huge quantity of controlled substance under concealed identity.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 438 — Anticipatory bail — In corruption offences: Law clarified on grant of anticipatory bail in
“From the harmonious reading of the provisions of PC & PNDT Act, which make the offences as cognizable and non-bailable along with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, it cannot be said that no FIR can be registered or that the registration of FIR is barred under PC & PNDT Act.”
The wife was previously employed as a guest teacher. However, owing to the compelling responsibilities of single-handedly raising the child coupled with the burden of long commuting hours, she had to discontinue her employment.
Rather than exercising its jurisdiction, P.S. Adarsh Nagar proceeded to register a Zero FIR and transferred the matter to the police in Noida. Such action indicates a failure on part of the police authorities concerned to adhere to their statutory responsibility under Section 1541 of the CrPC.
Consumer Protection — Consumer/Consumer Dispute/Locus Standi — Right to sue/Persons who may sue: Matter relating to maintainability of complaint by a Trust,
When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, the Court will not ordinarily embark upon an inquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it the accusations will not be sustained, as that is the function of the Trial Court.
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot exercise the administrative power of transfer of case from one Court to another within its jurisdiction, unless an order is passed by the High Court under Section 10(2) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Since the Call Detail Records and location data have only been ordered to be preserved and not disclosed, there is no basis for the petitioner’s apprehension that this would provide an undue advantage to the defence. The direction simply ensures that potentially relevant evidence is not lost due to automatic deletion.
“The record shows that the petitioner (‘accused’) has committed heinous offences while he was on bail in other cases; and he has been convicted in the offences committed while on bail. When there is a long list of serious criminal involvements, the apprehension that the accused suffers from recidivism cannot be dismissed as imaginary.”
“Limitation seeks to prevent abuse of process by filing vexatious and belated prosecutions. However, at the same time, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) is not blind to the problems faced by litigants and provides for extension of the limitation period in certain cases under Section 4731 of the CrPC. Thus, CrPC also ensures that interests of bona fide complainants are not affected.”