Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
![chargesheet without FSL report entitle accused to] default bail](https://www.scconline.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/whether-440x293.webp)
The matter has been placed before the Chief Justice of India for considering tagging it with Directorate of Enforcement v. Manpreet Singh Talwar [SLP(Crl.) No.5724 of 2023], wherein similar question is still pending before a three-Judge Bench of the Court.
Supreme Court noted that the right of the investigating officer to pray for further investigation in terms of Section 173 (8) is not taken away only because a chargesheet is filed under Section 173 (2) against the accused.
As on date, there are no rules prescribed by the State Government which provide a particular method of communicating the complainants/informants as per Section 173(2)(ii) CrPC to ensure uniformity, transparency and effective implementation of the provision, in its letter and spirit.
The Court stated that any interference under S. 482 of CrPC would be rendering approval of the accused-advocate’s depravity and will have a chilling effect on legal profession. Thus, the accused-advocate must come clean in a full-blown trial.
Allahabad High Court said that as the matter is very old, the Trial Court shall take into consideration the length of the litigation and shall proceed with the case in accordance with law in a time bound manner
The Karnataka High Court while expressing its shock over unlikeliness of sexual abuse in open places, quashed the charges of sexual harassment and fraud against the petitioner
The petitioner had contended that on account of his wife’s death, he was released on interim bail and had duly complied with all the conditions and had timely surrendered himself. The petitioner had also mentioned the fact that the two main accused in the case were enlarged on bail three years ago who were residents of Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.
Delhi High Court directed that the concerned Police and law enforcement authorities conduct periodic inspections to ensure that such material is not sold inasmuch as users and consumers of this material may not be aware of the dangers posed by this `Chinese Manjha' and may be using it innocently.
Allahabad High Court has held that the Trial Court has, after analysing the entire facts and evidence have concluded that there is sufficient ground to frame charges against the accused, and thus has rejected the discharge application. So, there is no illegality in the impugned order
Justice C.T. Ravikumar is known among the legal circle for having a firm grasp of precedents and statutory provisions.. We have curated some of his important High Court and Supreme Court decisions.
Bombay High Court remarked that they have come across at least three such cases in last three weeks wherein the statement of the prosecutrix has been totally disbelieved in the grave and a serious offence under Section 376 IPC by not following the law enunciated by the Supreme Court in its catena of decisions. It is the second case in this week wherein Police did not adhere to the basic principles of investigation.
The Supreme Court also held that the dictum as laid by this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Shiva alias Shivaji Ramaji Sonawane, (2015) 14 SCC 272 is the correct exposition of law and does not require any relook.
Delhi High Court grants bail to accused persons reiterating that, no accused can be indefinitely detained in custody having already undergone 50% of the sentence.
Any irregularity or illegality in the remand order is not a statutorily sanctioned reason for grant of default bail
“A difference in the seniority of a particular officer is not the same as a difference in their ranks.”
Madras High Court: V Sivagnanam J. directed the State police to add the offences under Sections 417 and 420 Penal
Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi: While granting bail to the applicant Pramond Kumar Bhasin, Ajay Gulati, J. observed that the charge sheet
Delhi High Court: Yashwant Varma J. categorically held that an allocation of coal cannot possibly be viewed as amounting to ‘proceeds of
Supreme Court: The Division Bench comprising B.R. Gavai and Hima Kohli, JJ., (Vacation Bench) reversed the order of the Gujarat High Court,
Karnataka High Court: Sreenivas Harish Kumar J. dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that