Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The record shows that the petitioner (‘accused’) has committed heinous offences while he was on bail in other cases; and he has been convicted in the offences committed while on bail. When there is a long list of serious criminal involvements, the apprehension that the accused suffers from recidivism cannot be dismissed as imaginary.”
“Limitation seeks to prevent abuse of process by filing vexatious and belated prosecutions. However, at the same time, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) is not blind to the problems faced by litigants and provides for extension of the limitation period in certain cases under Section 4731 of the CrPC. Thus, CrPC also ensures that interests of bona fide complainants are not affected.”
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Ss. 235(1) and (2) — Reopening of judgment of conviction: As per S. 235, a judgment of conviction, held
The allegation against the petitioner is that being an Advocate, he has given the search report based on which loan was disbursed and later it was found that the loan was disbursed to a person who did not even have property which was mortgaged in his name.
The power conferred in the High Court under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, is a residuary power and to be exercised only when no alternative remedy is available.
Section 482 of Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) deleted the guiding factors which the Courts hearing anticipatory bail applications might have taken into account, such as nature and gravity of accusation, criminal antecedents, and the possibility of the accused to flee from justice.
The Court stated that mere fact that at present hospitalisation was not required and the applicant can be treated on outpatient basis did not disentitle the applicant from grant of medical bail.
By a saving clause, which is construed to be an internal aid for the purpose of construction of a statute, saves the provisions of the old Code/repealed Code, i.e, in the present case, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for certain categories of investigation, inquiry, appeals, application, etc.
The Court directed the Registrar General of this Court to send a copy of this Order to the Principal District Judge, Jamshedpur with a direction to impress upon the Judicial Magistrate concerned, not to pass orders in such reckless manner, without application of mind and unnecessarily enhance the burden upon this Court.
The Court opined that as parties have amicably settled their disputes, no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with proceedings of the present FIR as it will create further acrimony between the parties.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 5: Principles summarised re scope of interference by Court under S. 34. Supervisory,
“It is also the case of complainant that the accused persons including the petitioner had been defaming the complaint regularly through social media and the social media posts of the alleged incidents are even available on internet till date.”
“Had it been the intention of the Legislature, it would have in unequivocal terms mentioned in the statute itself about impleadment of the victim as a necessary party in all cases.”
“When a case is committed by the Court of Magistrate to the Court of Session, the Magistrate becomes functus officio and any evidence recorded therein cannot be held to be admissible for the purposes of a de novo trial before the committal Court.”
“Unless there is any blatant mistake or error on the face of the record which may lead to miscarriage of justice, the Revisional Court shall not exercise its diligence over the matter.”
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.
“During the said period of trial, there is no occasion for the applicant to keep him languishing behind the bars, as it would serve no purpose especially in view of the aforesaid and as it is a trite law that no person is presumed guilty until proven otherwise.”
by Siddharth R. Gupta†
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 53
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — S. 174(2)(c) — Scope of: First part protects any right, privilege, obligation, etc. under
by Vaibhav Garg† and Devansh Malhotra††