Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court stated that admittedly, the death is homicidal, and the doctor also found that the cause of death is injury, which was inflicted upon the deceased persons. Therefore, the ocular evidence corroborates with the medical evidence.
The physical contact made by the accused with the girls coupled with the words uttered by him could only lead to one inference that the touch was with sexual intent.
The Court referred to Jolly George Varghese v. Bank of Cochin, (1980) 2 SCC 360 quoting Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer that “to be poor, in this land of Daridranayan, is no crime, and to recover debts by the procedure of putting one in prison is too flagrantly violative of Article 21 unless there is proof of the minimal fairness of his wilful failure to pay in spite of his sufficient means”.
The Court noted that apart from one WhatsApp message, which was not incriminating, nothing else was found from the raid at the petitioner house. Still the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 2½ years.
“Though an attempt was made to portray the incidents that led to the registration of the crime as one having transnational ramifications based upon the affidavit of the State Government filed in the Supreme Court, this Court is of the view that the circumstances do not persuade this Court to rely on the said averment to direct a CBI investigation”
The Court stated that allowing the proceedings to continue will amount to an abuse of the process of law.
The unusual condition, which was imposed and later, was not modified, clearly shows that the Trial Court travelled beyond its powers and imposed such conditions, which was normally not required when granting bail.
The Court stated that this is not a case of ransom because the appellants had not called the complainant’s wife to pay ransom, and it is possible that they were planning to receive the rest of the amount of the vehicle from ‘X’.
The Court referred to Govind Sakharam Ubhe v. State of Maharashtra, 2009 SCC OnLine Bom 770, wherein it was held that the charge under MCOCA ropes in a person who as a member of the syndicate commits organised crime either individually or jointly.
The High Court quashed the order of the Juvenile Justice Board remanding the accused minor to an Observation Home.
The Court held that the benefit of reasonable doubt shall be given to the appellants and therefore partly allowed both the appeals, by acquitting them under Section 302 of IPC, and releasing the incarcerated appellants sentenced under Section 307 of IPC, for having served the ordered sentence period.
The Court emphasised on the settled position that when two views are possible to a case, then the one that is favours the accused must be adopted.
The Court noted that cognizance of the offence was not taken by the Trial Court as stipulated by Section 2(d) of the MCOCA, therefore, the accused persons could not be prosecuted on the charges of S. 3 MCOCA.
A same act may not amount to cheating and criminal breach of trust at the same time as for cheating, dishonest intention must exist at the inception of the transaction, whereas, for criminal breach of trust, there must exist a relationship between the parties, whereby one party entrusts another with the property as per law, albeit dishonest intention comes later.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 37 r/w Ss. 2(4) and 16 — Jurisdiction of arbitrator to adjudicate under
The Court opined that the prosecution did not place any material or evidence to conclude that reformation, rehabilitation, and social re-integration of the accused into society was not possible.
The Court opined that is important to acknowledge that individuals vary in their sensitivity and temperament. It is not solely the feelings of the deceased that would matter, but most importantly, the intention behind the act of the accused would also have to be discerned.
The Court opined that there was no detailed report of the assessment made, no document was enclosed along with the report of conducting assessment, procedure adopted, factors assessed, mode of assessment, evaluation of child based on the stages of assessment.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 5: Principles summarised re scope of interference by Court under S. 34. Supervisory,
The allegation with respect to applicants teasing the deceased in regard to the failure of his romantic relationship with applicant does not appear to be instigation which would amount to abetment of suicide in terms of Section 306 of the Penal Code, 1860.