HOME
ABOUT US
PRODUCTS
CONTACT
LOGIN
|
SIGNUP
HOME
ABOUT US
PRODUCTS
CONTACT
LOGIN
|
SIGNUP
All
Judgement
Headnote
Auto
And
Or
Search
Latest Cases
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Narco-analysis test – Forceful subjection of an individual to techniques, such as narco-analysis test, violates personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India – While need for modern investigative techniques may be true, such investigative techniques cannot be conducted at cost of constitutional guarantees under Articles 20(3) and 21.
(2) Bail application does not involve entering into a roving enquiry or accepting use of involuntary investigative techniques.
(3) Disclosure Statement – In absence of supporting evidence, conviction cannot be based solely on such information.
(4) There is no indefeasible right with accused to undergo a narco-analysis test. ,09 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT POINT
Preventive Detention – Provision for preventive detention is an extraordinary power in hands of State that must be used sparingly – State should move for cancellation of bail of detenu, instead of placing him under law of preventive detention. ,06 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT POINT
Misdeclaration of goods – It cannot be said that penal charges can only be applied prior to delivery of goods. ,05 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Extortion – Commission of offence of extortion is not sine qua non for offence under Section 387, IPC – For prosecution under Section 387, IPC, delivery of property is not necessary – Section 387, IPC, being a penal provision, has to be strictly interpreted.
(2) Penal statutes must be given strict interpretation – Court ought not to read anything into a statutory provision that imposes penal liability. ,05 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT POINT
Quashing – A legitimate criminal prosecution cannot be interdicted by High Court – Task of High Court, when called upon to adjudicate application seeking to quash proceedings, is to see whether, prima facie, an offence is made out or not – It is not to examine whether charges may hold up in Court – In doing so, area of action is circumscribed. ,05 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT POINT
Government entities must demonstrate diligence in filing appeals; bureaucratic delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay under the Limitation Act. ,05 Jun 2025
Jharkhand High Court
IMPORTANT POINT
Public interest litigations must demonstrate genuine public interest and timely action, with courts verifying the petitioner's credentials and the validity of claims before proceeding. ,05 Jun 2025
Jharkhand High Court
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Murder and disappearance of evidence – In a case based on circumstantial evidence, facts indicating subsequent conduct are relevant facts under Section 8 of Evidence Act – When Court is faced with a situation wherein two different views appear to be reasonably possible, matter is to be decided in favour of accused.
(2) Burden of Proof – In law, there is significant difference in evidentiary burden to be discharged by prosecution and accused.
(3) Motive – In a case based on circumstantial evidence, motive is relevant – However, it is not conclusive of the matter – Motiveless crimes are not unknown to society. ,04 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT POINT
Appeal/Revision against conviction – Right to prefer appeal is not only a statutory right but also a constitutional right – Accused has right to not only challenge a judgment on its merits but also on procedural aspects of trial.
In an appeal filed only by accused/convict, High Court cannot suo motu exercise its revisional jurisdiction and enhance sentence against accused while maintaining conviction.
Sentence imposed must be concomitant with charge(s) framed and findings arrived at while arriving at judgment of conviction. ,04 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Cruelty – Judicial decision cannot be blurred to actual facts and circumstances of a case – Case cannot proceed on bald and omnibus allegations.
(2) Complaint – Limitation – For computation of limitation period under Section 468, Cr.P.C., relevant date is date of filing of complaint or date of institution of prosecution and not the date on which Magistrate takes cognizance. ,04 Jun 2025
Supreme Court of India
Notes
Notifications on Mobile App Shortly Launching
22-03-2021 17:39:52
Data Browser
India
United Kingdom
Tribunals
United States
News & Updates
Shilpa Sailesh Vs Varun Sreenivasan
01-05-2023 17:57:20
Products
