25 Important SC Judgments On Criminal Law - 2019

Magistrate Can Invoke Power U/S 156(3) CrPC even at post-cognizance stage, SC says 43 Yr old precedent wrongly decidedVinubhai Haribhai Malaviya and others v The State of GujaratA three judge bench of the Supreme Court virtually overruled a 43 year old precedent and held that Magistrate can invoke power under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure even at post-cognizance stage. The bench headed by Justice RF Nariman held that this judgment was rendered without adverting to the definition of "investigation" in Section 2(h) of the CrPC. It was observed that the finding in law in the said judgment that the power under Section 156(3) CrPC can only be exercised at the pre-cognizance stage is erroneous. Acquittal If IO & Informant Same Person: Benefit Of 'Mohan Lal' Judgment Not Available To Cases Prior To ItVarinder Kumar vs. State of Himachal PradeshIn an important judgment, the Supreme Court observed that all pending criminal prosecutions, trials and appeals prior to the law laid down in the judgment in Mohan Lal vs. State of Punjab (acquittal if investigator-informant is the same person), shall continue to be governed by the individual facts of the case.Later, a two judge bench expressed its disagreement with the view taken by a three-judge bench in Mohan Lal vs. State of Punjab where it held that that the accused is entitled to acquittal if informant and the investigator in NDPS cases is the same person. The matter was therefore referred to larger bench. A Constitution Bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra is considering the matter at present. 498A Case Can Be Filed At A Place Where A Woman Driven Out Of Matrimonial Home Takes ShelterRupali Devi V. State of Uttar PradeshAnswering a reference pending for about seven years, the Supreme Court held that the courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code Magistrate Has Power To Direct An Accused To Give Voice Samples During Investigation Without His ConsentRitesh Sinha v State of U.P.In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court held that a judicial magistrate can direct an accused to provide his voice samples for investigation even without his consent. The three-judges bench led by the CJI thus settled the confusion which arose out of the split verdict in the 2012 verdict by a two judges bench.Section 143A NI Act On Interim Compensation Has No Retrospective ApplicationGJ Raja vs. TejrajSuranaSettling a confusion in prosecution of cheque bounce cases, the Supreme Court held that Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act on payment of interim compensation to the complainant during the pendency of the case has no retrospective application.Section 148 Of Negotiable Instruments Act Has Retrospective EffectSurinder Singh Deswal @ Col. S.S. Deswal vs. Virender GandhiIn an important judgment, the Supreme Court held that Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as amended, shall be applicable in respect of the appeals against the order of conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, even in a case where the criminal complaints for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act were filed prior to 2018 amendment Act i.e., prior to 01.09.2018. Police Cannot Attach Immovable Property Under Sec.102 CrPC During InvestigationNevada Properties Private Limited V. State Of Maharashtra And AnrThe Supreme Court held that police does not have the power to attach immovable property during investigation under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The judgment was delivered by the bench comprising CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna. However, police does have authority to freeze moveable properties of the accused, clarified the bench. The Supreme Court held that the expression 'any property' appearing in Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would not include 'immovable property'. The bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Sanjiv Khanna observed thus while holding that a power of a police officer under Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code to seize any property, which may be found under circumstances that create suspicion of the commission of any offence, would not include the power to attach, seize and seal an immovable property. SC Upholds Constitutionality Of Section 23 Of PCPNDT Act, Complete Contents Of Form 'F' MandatoryFederation of Obstetrics and Gynecological Societies of India V. Union of IndiaThe Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional Validity of Sections 23(1) and 23(2) of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 . Dismissing a writ petition filed by Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological...

25 Important SC Judgments On Criminal Law - 2019

Ashok Kini

Tags