Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“An act done by a person pursuant to the judgment of the Court cannot form basis for prosecuting such person as the same does not come within the definition of “offence” as contained in IPC.”
“In a democracy, of the people, by the people, and for the people, peaceful protest is a constitutional right. Simply because an individual took to the streets to protest in order to safeguard their rights when their interests were affected does not imply that they have committed offences.”
“In Indian societal norms, the matters relating to sexual assault in large number of cases are not being reported by women timely… The possibility of accused taking benefit of the situation… cannot be ruled out.”
Cruelty under Section 498-A IPC does not necessarily require proof of dowry demands; physical or mental cruelty alone is sufficient.
“This is gross subterfuge on the part of the of the State. The FIR has been drawn in a manner so as to assist the suspect Mr. Vijay Shah to be able to have the FIR quashed on a later date.”
“The solemn obligation of the legal system is to distinguish between misfortune and culpability, and to ensure that human suffering, however profound, does not substitute for proof required under the law.”
“The law requires that for an allegation of malafide to be sustained, it must be pleaded with specificity and supported by material facts. In the absence of mens rea, or a demonstrable element of ill-intention, such a prayer cannot be entertained.”
The Court reiterated that heinous offences and crimes against society cannot be quashed merely on the basis of compromise.
“Statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of CrPC cannot be given preference over the FIR and the statement recorded under Section 161 of CrPC.”
“There is no allegation of hatching criminal conspiracy by the petitioner-daughter with her father or any connivance with regard to giving inducement to the complainant and causing loss to him.”
“Marriage, as we all know is an important sacrament and is considered as a sign of cohabitation between a male and a female which is acceptable in the civil society and is valid in the eyes of law.”
“A bare perusal of the FIR revealing commission of cognizable offence and the investigation has to be conducted.”
“One cannot lose sight of the reality that celebrities and public figures invariably tend to speak in a casual tone during interviews, and it is thus essential to consider the broader context rather than isolating specific words.”
The Court also reiterated that FIR is not an encyclopedia of all imputations. Therefore, to test whether an FIR discloses commission of a cognizable offence, what is to be looked at is not any omission in the accusations, but the gravamen of the accusations contained therein to find out whether, prima facie, some cognizable offence has been committed or not.
“The fact that the petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe may have caused some discomfort among the Trustees, leading to the denial of access. Such conduct by the Trustees is unacceptable.”
The Court held that “the prosecution of the petitioner is sugarcoated with ill-intention and made to belittle his image in the society.”
The Court noted that since the petitioner was not found to be involved in any offence, his plea for quashing the FIR no longer required adjudication.
The Court stated that the applicants had not acted in good faith, as they failed to take necessary steps to maintain the road or close/regulate traffic despite knowing the hazardous condition.
The Court opined that the objective of a preliminary inquiry is to screen out frivolous and motivated complaints, not to ascertain the veracity of the information received.
The Court held that while delay in reporting rape is not always material, in the present case, it is crucial due to the complainant’s history and the timing of her allegations.