Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up (20-26th Nov)

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 996 To 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1013Nominal IndexPriya Indoria v. State of Karnataka 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 996Vivek Kaisth and another v. The State of Himachal Pradesh 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997Moturu Nalini Kanth v. Gainedi Kaliprasad 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 998P. Kishore Kumar v. Vittal K. Patkar 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 999Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Mukul Aggarwal 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1000State of Jharkhand v. Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1002Pawan Kumar v. State of UP 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1003Shah Originals v. Commissioner of Income Tax-24, Mumbai 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1004 Nanhe v. State of UP 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1005Sarr Freights Corporation v. CJDARCL Logistics Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1006Ramkrishna Forgings Limited v Ravindra Loonkar 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1007State Of Punjab v Principal Secy To The Governor Of Punjab 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1008Shakeel Ahmed v. Syed Akhlaq Hussain 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1009Amandeep Singh Sran v. State of Delhi 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1012Aditya Kumar v. State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1013Judgments/OrdersConditions For Transit Anticipatory Bail In FIRs Registered In Other States: Supreme Court ExplainsCase title: Priya Indoria v. State of KarnatakaCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 996In a significant and groundbreaking judgment, the Supreme Court has held that High Courts and Sessions Court have the power to grant interim/transit anticipatory bail even when the First Information Report (FIR) has been registered in another State.The Court finally set aside the judgment of Patna High Court in Syed Zafrul Hassan and the judgment of Calcutta High Court in Sadhan Chandra Kolay to the extent that they hold that the High Court does not possess jurisdiction to grant extra-territorial anticipatory bail i.e., even a limited or transit anticipatory bailPolice Must Secure Transit Remand For Arrests Outside State To Safeguard Rights Under Article 22 : Supreme CourtCase title: Priya Indoria v. State of KarnatakaCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 996The Supreme Court recently held that the police have to obtain a transit remand when arresting an individual outside the jurisdiction where the offence is registered. This mandate is in line with the requirements of Article 22 of the Constitution, emphasizing the need for police to facilitate the accused's transfer from the location of arrest to the jurisdiction where the crime is registered.High Courts, Session Courts Can Grant Interim/Transit Anticipatory Bail Even When FIR Is Registered In Another State: Supreme CourtCase title: Priya Indoria v. State of KarnatakaCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 996The Supreme Court today held that the Sessions Court or High Court would have the power to grant interim/transit anticipatory bail, when the FIR is not registered within the territory of a particular State but in a different State.The Court observed : "...we hold that the Court of Session or the High Court, as the case may be, can exercise jurisdiction and entertain a plea for limited anticipatory bail even if the FIR has not been filed within its territorial jurisdiction and depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, if the accused apprehending arrest makes out a case for grant of anticipatory bail but having regard to the fact that the FIR has not been registered within the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court or Court of Session, as the case may, at the least consider the case of the accused for grant of transit anticipatory bail which is an interim protection of limited duration till such accused approaches the competent Sessions Court or the High Court, as the case may be, for seeking full-fledged anticipatory bail"'Appointments Only On Advertised Vacancies': Supreme Court Holds 2 Judges To Be Wrongly Appointed; Refuses To Unseat Them Noting 10 Yrs ServiceCase Title: Vivek Kaisth and another v. The State of Himachal Pradesh and othersCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997The Supreme Court recently held the procedure adopted by the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission and the High Court in the selection of Civil Judge (Junior Divisions) in 2013 to be wrong and consequently, the appointments of two judicial officers were found to be irregular. At the same time, the Court refused to unseat the two officers, considering the fact that they have rendered over ten years service and that there was no fault on their part in the irregularitiesWill Can't Be Proved As Per Sec 69 Evidence Act By A Random Witness Saying He Saw Attesting Witness Signing It: Supreme CourtCase Title: Moturu Nalini Kanth V. Gainedi KaliprasadCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 998The Supreme Court on Monday (20.11.2023) held that in order to prove the genuineness of a will, it is not enough to examine a random witness who asserts that he saw the attesting witness affix his signature in the Will.Section 69 of the Evidence Act deals with proving the authenticity of a document in cases where no attesting witnesses are found. Under the said provision, it must be...

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up (20-26th Nov)

Suraj Parmar

Tags