TRANSFER PETITION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASE-it won't be appropriate at this stage to deal with respective arguments and record findings, as it may ultimately affect the parties and their pending litigations.
Tag: Criminaldigest
A person shall not be criminally responsible under a Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court.
The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.
In accordance with the Law, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person:
(a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible;
(b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted;
(c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission;
Mohammad Azam Khan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (19/05/2022)
WRIT-Article 142 of the Constitution of India-personal liberty-BAIL-grant interim bail to the petitioner in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, till he files the application for regular bail and the same is considered by the Competent Court.
In Re: To Issue certain guidelines regarding Inadequacies and Deficiencies in Criminal Trials Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors- 20/04/2021
This suo motu proceeding under Article 32 was initiated during the course of hearing of a criminal appeal (Crl.A.400/2006 & connected matters). The Court noticed common deficiencies which occur in the course of criminal trials and certain practices adopted by trial courts in criminal proceedings as well as in the disposal of criminal cases and causes.
K. Subramani Vs. K. Damodara Naidu-13/11/2014
Section 139 of the N.I. Act-Capacity to lend money-the complainant had no source of income to lend a sum of Rs.14 lakhs to the accused and he failed to prove that there is legally recoverable debt payable by the accused to him.
Harjit Singh Vs. Inderpreet Singh @ Inder and Anr – 24/08/2021
Apex Court does not interfere with Bail order of HC. But, where the discretion of HC to grant bail has been exercised without due application of mind or in contravention of directions of apex Court, granting bail is liable to be set aside.
Madhav Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh-18/08/2021
It happens at times that the real culprit lodges the first information against known or unknown persons, to misdirect the investigation of an offence
Naresh Kumar Vs Kalawati and Ors-25/03/2021
A dying declaration is admissible in evidence under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It alone can also form the basis for conviction if it has been made voluntarily and inspires confidence. If there are contradictions, variations, creating doubts about its truthfulness, affecting its veracity and credibility or if the dying declaration is suspect, or the accused is able to create a doubt not only with regard to the dying declaration but also with regard to the nature and manner of death, the benefit of doubt shall have to be given to the accused. Therefore much shall depend on the facts of a case. There can be no rigid standard or yardstick for acceptance or rejection of a dying declaration.
Sumedh Singh Saini Vs. State of Punjab and Anr- 3/12/2020
FIR has been lodged/filed by the brother of the deceased after a period of almost 29 years from the date of incident and after a period of 9 years from the date of decision of this Court in the case of Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar (supra) and nothing is on record that in between he had taken any steps to initiate criminal proceedings and/or lodged an FIR, we are of the opinion that at least a case is made out by the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C. Many a time, delay may not be fatal to the criminal proceedings. However, it always depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. However, at the same time, a long delay like 29 years as in the present case can certainly be a valid consideration for grant of anticipatory bail.
Rajasthan, Jaipur vs Balchand-20/09/1977
The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative.
Rajesh Dhiman Vs State of Himachal Pradesh-26/10/2020
Whether bias was caused by complainant also being the investigating officer?
Whether alternate version has been established and what is the effect of lack of independent witnesses?
Whether High Court erred in reversing acquittal in appeal?
Raveen Kumar vs State of Himachal Pradesh -26/10/2020
(A) What is the scope and essence of the High Court’s appellate jurisdiction against a judgment of acquittal?
(B) What is the extent of reliance upon a document with which the other side was not confronted with during cross-examination?
C) Whether non-examination of independent witnesses vitiates the prosecution case?
Dr. Monica Kumar and ANR Vs State of U.P and ORS-27/05/2008
Under Article 142 of the Constitution this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any 'cause' or 'matter' pending before it. The expression “cause” or “matter” would include any proceeding pending in court and it would cover almost every kind of proceeding in court including civil or criminal.
State of Rajasthan vs Mehram & Ors-06/05/2020
QUANTUM OF PUNISHMENT-The learned counsel for the accused No. 5 was at pains to persuade us that the said accused is now about 70/75 years of age and at this distance of time, it may not be appropriate to send him back to jail. Taking overall view of the matter, we are not impressed by this submission. Even in case of offence under Section 326, IPC, which commended to the High Court, the same was punishable with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description which may extend to ten years and also liable to fine. Had it been a conviction under Section 326, as aforesaid, the sentence of only about five months in the facts of the present case, by no stretch of imagination, was adequate.
Tarlok Singh and others Vs State of Punjab-30/07/1973
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898—Section 288 and Evidence Act, 1872— Section 33—Evidence of a witness given in the committal Court—Cannot be treated as evidence after his death in session trial under Section 288 though it may be considered relevant under Section 33 Evidence Act.
State of Maharashtra Vs Dr. Praful B. Desai-01/04/2003
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 273 and 284—Recording of evidence by video conferencing—Issuance of commission—Permissibility—When attendance of a witness cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience—Commission can be issued to record evidence by way of video conferencing.
Advocatetanmoy Law Library 