Supreme court
Prosecution Can't Seek To Prove In Trial A Fact Which Witness Hasn't Told Police During Investigation : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court (on January 04), while allowing the criminal appeal of the accused-appellant, observed that during a trial, the prosecution could not seek to prove a fact that the witness has not stated in his/her statement under Section 161 (Examination of witnesses by police) of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973."Prosecution cannot seek to prove a fact during trial through a witness...
Section 27 Evidence Act Vulnerable To Abuse, Courts Must Be Vigilant : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, in its verdict delivered on January 03, while making somepertinent observations regarding Section 27 of the Evidence Act, also cautioned that the police frequently use this provision and the courts must be vigilant about its application. “Section 27 of the Evidence Act is frequently used by the police, and the courts must be vigilant about its application to...
HC Bench Bound By Judgment Of Coordinate Bench : Supreme Court Stresses Importance Of 'Judicial Discipline'
The Supreme Court, in its recent judgment (on January 03), highlighted the importance of ensuring judicial discipline. The Court went on to observe that when a decision of a coordinate Bench of same High Court is brought to the notice, it is to be respected and is binding on the bench. However, the same is subject to right of a co-equal quorum bench to take a different view and refer...
IBC | Statutory Set Off Or Insolvency Set Off Inapplicable To Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held statutory set off or insolvency set off is not applicable to Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). Further, Regulation 29 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 (“Liquidation Regulations”), which provides for mutual dealing and...
UAPA| Terrorism Cases Not To Be Taken Lightly: Supreme Court Sets Aside Default Bail
In a case pertaining to grant of default bail to a person accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (“UAPA”), the Supreme Court yesterday allowed an appeal filed by the Delhi police, observing that the High Court fell in error in granting default bail and should not have taken the matter so lightly. A Division Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh...
Judicial Officers' Pay : Supreme Court Directs States To Clear SNJPC Arrears By Feb 29; Asks HCs To Set Up Committees To Oversee
The Supreme Court has directed the State Governments to pay the arrears to judges in terms of the payscales enhanced as per the recommendations of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC) by February 29, 2024.The judgment also contains directions to the High Courts to set up a Committee to oversee the implementation of the SNJPC recommendations. It will be known as the...
Four Conditions To Invoke Section 27 Of Indian Evidence Act : Supreme Court Explains
The Supreme Court (on January 03), in a crucial judgment with respect to section 27 of the Evidence Act, reiterated the three conditions to invoke this provision. While doing so, the bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti relied upon Mohmed Inayatullah v. State of Maharashtra., (1976) 1 SCC 828. The first condition is the discovery of a fact. This fact should be...
Supreme Court Annual Digest 2023-Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Curtailment of 15 days of police custody by any extraneous circumstances, act of God, an order of Court not being the handy work of investigating agency would not act as a restriction. (Para 60) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 611Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Difference in the power of Police to register and investigate an FIR...
'Custody' Under S.27 Evidence Act Doesn't Mean Custody After Formal Arrest; Includes Any Kind Of Restraint Or Surveillance: Supreme Court
In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has held that the expression 'custody' used in Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act does not mean formal custody."It includes any kind of restriction, restraint or even surveillance by the police. Even if the accused was not formally arrested at the time of giving information, the accused ought to be deemed, for all practical purposes, in the...
No Conviction Possible Under S.364A IPC If Prosecution Doesn't Prove Abduction Was Coupled With Ransom Demand & Life Threat : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court (on January 03), in the context of Section 364 A (Kidnapping For Ransom) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, observed that apart from proving the act of abduction, the prosecution must also prove the demand of ransom along with the threat to the life of the abducted person.“The necessary ingredients which the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, before the Court...
High Court Chief Justices Have No Power To Frame Rules On Post-Retiral Benefits To Former Judges : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on January 3, while setting aside the directions of the Allahabad High Court to take into custody two Secretaries of the Uttar Pradesh Government for alleged non-compliance of directions regarding the facilities to retired judges, expressly stated that the High Court Chief Justices acting on the administrative side do not have any powers to usurp the rulemaking responsibility...