Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on the credibility of injured eyewitnesses.
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act, 1872.
Bombay High Court expressed that it was persuaded to stay her conviction due to the fact that she was employed as a sweeper and had to provide for basic needs of her grandchildren.
Calcutta High Court held that there does not appear to be any discrepancies in the statements and evidence provided, therefore the same can be considered reliable and trustworthy, beyond all reasonable doubt.
Supreme Court opined that the Trial Court, as well as, the Bombay High Court have rightly appreciated the evidence and convicted the convict for the offence punishable under Sections 307 and 332 of the IPC
This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on duty of appellate court under Criminal Procedure Code, 1898.
“Nothing has improved even after more than a decade of “Nirbhaya”. Women also have the right to life and liberty. They also have the right to be respected and treated as equal citizens. Their honour and dignity cannot be touched or violated”.
Rahul Gandhi was sentenced to two years imprisonment for offence under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC for his ‘all thieves have Modi surname’ remark.
The Supreme Court was hearing Rahul Gandhi’s plea challenging Gujarat High Court’s order dismissing his application to stay two years conviction Order.
The instant matter related to a person killed while he was travelling with his group on scooter, allegedly by constables patrolling the village, which was investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (‘CBI’).
Punjab and Haryana High Court perused the affidavit submitted by the Superintendent of Prison, according to which, the petitioner had already undergone custody of more than 2 years and 5 months.
The daughter was 16 years and 4 months old studying in class 11 when she allegedly witnessed her father being shot with a gun by two people, then herself being fastened with the charges of killing her father.
The Supreme Court in State of M.P. v. Shyamsunder Trivedi, (1995) 4 SCC 262 observed that, it would be police officials alone who can only explain the circumstances in which a person in their custody had died.
The Supreme Court was of the view that the High Court ought to have interfered with the conviction when it found one of the links in circumstantial evidence missing and not proved, respecting the settled law in this regard.
While hearing the appeal against conviction for attempt to murder, the Court stated that the accused’s actions fall under ‘causing grievous hurt’ rather than ‘attempt to murder’.
Madras High Court said that this is a case which brings out the dark side of human behavior. It focuses our attention on the ugly facets of our society; the caste system, bigotry, inhuman treatment of persons belonging to the marginalised section etc.
In 2015, a young Dalit Engineering student was abducted, and his head was severed for allegedly having a relationship with an upper caste woman.
Delhi High Court observed that it cannot lose sight of the fact that alleged offence was committed with a child victim of tender age who got frightened by the threats extended to him by the accused as well as by the alleged act of the accused and it is not expected that a child of such a tender age would behave like an adult by raising the alarm promptly.
The teacher in the instant matter was convicted in a criminal case for showing obscene pictures to a girlchild, while conducting classes.
Delhi High Court opined that the cause of death was found to be cranio cerebral damage consequent upon blunt force impact to the head which was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.