{"id":313087,"date":"2024-02-05T12:00:12","date_gmt":"2024-02-05T06:30:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=313087"},"modified":"2024-02-08T18:26:04","modified_gmt":"2024-02-08T12:56:04","slug":"prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/","title":{"rendered":"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC; Calcutta High Court sets aside trial court\u2019s order"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> In a revision petition challenging the order of Special stalling the trial and directing the CBI to obtain sanction to make Prosecution Witness an accused, a single-judge bench comprising of Shampa Dutt (Paul),* J., held that the PW-3-accused is entitled to the benefit of Section 132<\/a> of the Evidence Act, 1872<\/a> and Section 307<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> and set aside the impugned order.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/p>\n

In the instant matter, the CBI registered an FIR on 10-08-1994 against several individuals from Tea Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (TTCL) and M\/s. International Linkers, based on source information, alleging a criminal conspiracy among officials to favor M\/s. International Linkers, resulting in the payment of Rs. 4.5 Lakhs as a security deposit. The case involved alleged double payment to the landlord by the TTCL authority through two cheques, bearing the signatures of the accused-PW-3 and co-accused, issued within a fortnight without confirming the encashment of the first cheque. The first cheque is not disputed, but the second cheque is contested as it resulted in double payment to the Landlord.<\/p>\n

The charge sheet filed on 25-02-1997 accused individuals under various sections of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, (IPC) and Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<\/a>. During the investigation, it was found that Senior Manager (Finance), was not involved in the criminal conspiracy and was listed as a prosecution witness 3 (PW-3). The trial commenced, and during the cross-examination of PW, the Special Judge presumed his involvement, leading to an order on 06-12-2018 stalling the trial and directing the CBI to obtain sanction to make him an accused.<\/p>\n

Aggrieved by the impugned order, the petitioner-CBI preferred a revision petition challenging the same and sought to set aside the impugned order, asserting that it is not proper, well-reasoned, and misinterprets the evidence and law.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Whether Senior Manager (Finance), listed as a prosecution witness, should be made an accused in the case?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    Whether the impugned order dated 06-12-2018 stalling the trial is justified?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Parties’ Contentions<\/p>\n

    The CBI contended that the PW was not involved in the criminal conspiracy, as evidenced by the investigation and the role he played in objecting to the proposed sanction of Rs. 2 lakhs. It was contended that the impugned order is challenged on the grounds that it ignored material evidence and misinterpreted the law. It was argued that PW is a crucial witness and not charge-sheeted, and his non-involvement in criminality is established by the evidence on record. The petitioner seeks the setting aside of the impugned order in the interest of justice. The CBI relied on Hardeep Singh<\/span> v. State of Punjab<\/span>, (2014) 3 SCC 92<\/a>, emphasising onthe cautious invocation of Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    Trial Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

    The PW-3, claimed innocence, arguing that he was misguided and misdirected by co-accused to sign the disputed second cheque. The trial court noted the PW-3’s statement that he noticed irregularities in 1993 but did not protest at the time of signing the disputed cheque weakened his defense. The trial court stated that the subsequent protest and objection after the commission of the offence couldn’t absolve an offender of criminal liabilities. The trial court referred to Section 76<\/a> of the IPC<\/a>, which provides protection to a person acting under the order and direction of a superior authority, however, held that there is no evidence that the accused was ordered to sign the disputed cheque by any co-accused. The trial court directed the prosecution to obtain sanction against PW-3 from the competent authority within three months.<\/p>\n

    Court’s Assessment<\/p>\n

    The Court emphasised on the discretionary nature of summoning an additional accused under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> and highlighted the importance of strong and cogent evidence before exercising such power. The Court referred to Juhru<\/span> v. Karim<\/span>, (2023) 5 SCC 406<\/a>, and highlighted Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a>, emphasising that the power to summon a person as an additional accused should be exercised sparingly based on strong and cogent evidence. The Court also cited Sukhpal Singh Khaira<\/span> v. State of Punjab<\/span>, (2023) 1 SCC 289<\/a>, for further clarification on the powers of the court under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    The CBI suggested an alternative approach by citing R. Dineshkumar<\/span> v. State<\/span>, (2015) 7 SCC 497<\/a>, where a witness was granted pardon and treated as an approver and the Supreme Court observed that “I hold that the evidence of the 2nd respondent, as a prosecution witness before the trial court, and the incriminating answers given by him amount to compelled testimony falling within the sweep of Section 132<\/a> of the Evidence Act<\/a> and thus, he is protected by the proviso to Section 132 of the Evidence Act.”<\/span> The Court while relying on R. Dineshkumar<\/span> (Supra), held that “PW-3, is entitled to the benefit of Section 132<\/a> of the Evidence Act<\/a> and also 25<\/a> Section 307<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a>.”<\/span><\/p>\n

    Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

    The Court allowed the revision and set aside the impugned order dated 06-12-2018, passed by the Special Judge. The Court directed that the trial court to proceed with the trial from the date preceding the date of the order under revision. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. Any interim order, if previously issued, stands vacated.<\/p>\n

    [CBI<\/span> v. Mrinmoy Chandra<\/span>, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 944<\/a>, order dated 01-02-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

    *Judgment by Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

    Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

    Ms. Chandreyi Alam, Counsel for the Petitioner\/CBI<\/p>\n

    Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

    \"penal<\/a><\/p>\n

    Buy Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

    \"prevention<\/a><\/p>\n

    Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

    \"Code<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Calcutta High Court emphasised the need for the trial court to adhere to legal procedures and directed to proceed with the trial from the date preceding the date of the order under revision.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":290502,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2689,10481,65041,31606,65042,65043,7181],"class_list":["post-313087","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-cbi","tag-justice-shampa-dutt","tag-prosecution-witness","tag-section-132-of-the-evidence-act","tag-section-307-of-the-crpc","tag-trial-court"],"yoast_head":"\nProsecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court held that Prosecution Witness is entitled to the benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC and set aside trial court\u2019s order\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC; Calcutta High Court sets aside trial court\u2019s order\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court held that Prosecution Witness is entitled to the benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC and set aside trial court\u2019s order\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-02-05T06:30:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-02-08T12:56:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC; Calcutta High Court sets aside trial court\u2019s order\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/\",\"name\":\"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-02-05T06:30:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-02-08T12:56:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"Calcutta High Court held that Prosecution Witness is entitled to the benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC and set aside trial court\u2019s order\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"calcutta high court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC; Calcutta High Court sets aside trial court\u2019s order\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog","description":"Calcutta High Court held that Prosecution Witness is entitled to the benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC and set aside trial court\u2019s order","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC; Calcutta High Court sets aside trial court\u2019s order","og_description":"Calcutta High Court held that Prosecution Witness is entitled to the benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC and set aside trial court\u2019s order","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-02-05T06:30:12+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-02-08T12:56:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC; Calcutta High Court sets aside trial court\u2019s order","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/","name":"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","datePublished":"2024-02-05T06:30:12+00:00","dateModified":"2024-02-08T12:56:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"Calcutta High Court held that Prosecution Witness is entitled to the benefit of Section 132 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 307 of the CrPC and set aside trial court\u2019s order","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"calcutta high court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/prosecution-witness-entitled-to-benefit-of-section-132-of-the-evidence-act-1872-and-section-307-of-the-crpc-cal-hc-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Prosecution Witness entitled to benefit of Section 132 of Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC; Calcutta High Court sets aside trial court\u2019s order"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":298949,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/09\/calcutta-high-court-acquits-accused-in-alleged-domestic-cruelty-case-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":313087,"position":0},"title":"Mental Cruelty is subjective and varies from person to person; Calcutta High Court acquits accused in alleged domestic cruelty case","author":"Ritu","date":"August 9, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held the trial court's findings were not aligned with the legal requirements for cruelty under Section 498A IPC.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":299796,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/22\/calcutta-hc-refuses-to-quash-proceeding-against-teacher-for-involvement-in-communal-disturbance-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":313087,"position":1},"title":"Calcutta High Court refuses to quash proceeding against teacher for involvement in Communal Disturbance case","author":"Ritu","date":"August 22, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Considering the nature of the alleged offences and the available evidence, the Calcutta High Court found a prima facie case against the petitioner to proceed to trial.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291549,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/08\/delhi-high-court-expunges-remarks-against-cbi-in-judicial-order-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":313087,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court sets aside the cost imposed on CBI and expunges remarks made against the authority in a judicial order","author":"Arunima","date":"May 8, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The duty of the Court has been tried to be delegated to the prosecuting agency in the present case.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":266951,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/17\/in-case-of-discrepancy-between-ocular-and-medical-evidence-ocular-testimony-shall-prevail\/","url_meta":{"origin":313087,"position":3},"title":"Cal HC | In case of discrepancy between ocular and medical evidence, ocular testimony shall prevail; Conviction set aside entitling benefit of doubt","author":"Editor","date":"May 17, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court: Bibek Chaudhury, J. allowed an appeal which was filed assailing the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court for committing offence under Section 324 of the Penal Code, 1860 and consequence sentence of imprisonment for a term of one year with fine. A written\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":299162,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/12\/calcutta-high-court-dismisses-revision-seeking-cancellation-of-bail-in-assault-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":313087,"position":4},"title":"Calcutta High Court dismisses revision seeking cancellation of bail in assault case","author":"Ritu","date":"August 12, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court criticized the trial court for solely relying on party's submissions and not calling for injury report.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":261242,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/05\/section-311-of-the-code-confers-a-wide-discretion-on-the-court-to-act-as-the-exigencies-of-justice-require\/","url_meta":{"origin":313087,"position":5},"title":"Law on S. 311 CrPC | Power to the Court to summon a material witness or to examine a person present in Court or to recall a witness already examined: All HC discusses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J., while addressing a matter with regard to recalling of the witnesses expressed that, Section 311 of the Code confers a wide discretion on the Court to act as the exigencies of justice require. Present application was filed under Section 482 of the Code\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/313087","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=313087"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/313087\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/290502"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=313087"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=313087"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=313087"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}