{"id":344908,"date":"2025-04-02T15:00:11","date_gmt":"2025-04-02T09:30:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=344908"},"modified":"2025-04-02T15:01:38","modified_gmt":"2025-04-02T09:31:38","slug":"criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"CRIMINAL LAW ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

ACQUITTAL<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Acquittal in Seemapuri robbery and kidnapping case upheld citing lack of evidence<\/p>\n

A criminal leave petition was filed under Section 378 of Criminal Procedure Code (now Section 419<\/a> of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a>) by the State, seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 6-12-2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi wherein the respondent was acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 365<\/a>, 395<\/a>, 397<\/a>, and 412<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>. Chandra Dhari Singh, J., upheld the acquittal as the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and thus, the benefit of doubt was rightly extended to the accused. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BAIL<\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Bail granted to MS Solutions founder Shuhaib in class 10 question paper leak case<\/p>\n

In a bail plea filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (‘BNSS’) 2023, by the founder of MS Solutions, Shuhaib, who was charged with leaking State Board Class 10 Question Papers through his YouTube channel, the Single Judge Bench of P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J. granted him bail subject to certain conditions. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Prima facie findings in bail orders not binding on Trial Court or Investigating officer<\/p>\n

In a matter concerning the impact of prima facie observations made during bail proceedings, P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J., held that simply because a prima facie opinion is arrived at by the bail court while deciding a bail application, it is not binding on the Trial Court at the time of the final hearing, nor it is binding on the Investigating Officer, debarring the collection of further evidence. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Grounds of arrest must be served in writing simultaneously with arrest memo; bail granted in abetment to suicide case<\/p>\n

A bail application was filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail in connection with FIR registered under Sections 306<\/a> and 34<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC) in a case relating to alleged abetment of suicide, who consumed poison and later succumbed to it. Vikas Mahajan, J., declared the arrest of the petitioner as invalid for not serving grounds of arrest properly and held that the petitioner be released from custody. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

GAUHATI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Read why the interim anticipatory bail granted to YouTuber Ashish Chanchlani was made absolute in India’s Got Latent controversy<\/p>\n

A Single Judge Bench of Mridul Kumar Kailta, J., made the interim anticipatory bail granted to Youtuber Ashish Chanchlani vide order dated 18-022025 absolute. On 18-02-2025, the Court had granted him anticipatory bail for an FIR lodged against him by the Gauhati Police for promoted obscenity and engaged in sexually explicit and vulgar discussion on India’s got latent show. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Mental condition of youngsters in our country is astonishing and disturbing’; Bail granted to 25-year-old who attacked mother over money refusal<\/p>\n

In a bail application filed under Section 483<\/a> of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNSS’), P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J. noting that retaining the accused in detention would serve no purpose and would only prolong the trauma for his mother, granted bail to him, subject to stringent conditions. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Bail granted to woman accused of inflicting burn injuries on her niece for spending Rs 10 on chocolates<\/p>\n

The applicant sought regular bail in a case registered with Malwani Police Station, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 307<\/a> and 506(2)<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>; Section 5(j)(1)<\/a> of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012<\/a>; and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. A Single Judge Bench of Shivkumar Dige, J., noted that the applicant was alleged to have inflicted burn injuries on the private part and thigh of the victim. The Court, after considering the incarceration period of the applicant of more than 4 years and 6 months, directed that the applicant should be enlarged on bail. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Suicide note did not reveal any serious fight in recent past’; Anticipatory bail granted to wife accused of abetting husband’s suicide<\/p>\n

In an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482<\/a> of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a>, by the accused-wife whose husband committed suicide, a Single Bench of Sanjay Vashisth, J., allowed the application, holding that the alleged suicide note did not reveal any serious fight or altercation between the couple which instigated the deceased to commit suicide and it was yet to be ascertained whether the deceased took such step due to the instigation of the accused or due to his weak mental health. The Court also considered the fact that the accused was a mother of two young children who required her daily care and there was no substantial material that had to be recovered from her possession. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Taliban-style punishment’; Anticipatory bail denied to a man accused of parading victims with blackened faces & ‘I am a thief’ placards<\/p>\n

In an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused for an FIR registered against him under Sections 127<\/a>, 356<\/a>, 74<\/a>, 75<\/a>, 61(2)<\/a> of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNS’), a Single Judge Bench of Namit Kumar, J., dismissed the application holding that the accused had acted in a Taliban style manner by blackening the faces of victims, parading them with placards and uploading a video of the same. The Court also held that the accused had been avoiding the process of law, and his custodial interrogation was necessary, thus if he was granted bail at this stage, he might influence or intimidate the witnesses and destroy the evidence. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Returning money does not end the crime’; Anticipatory bail denied to bank employee accused of siphoning Rs. 46.58 Lakhs<\/p>\n

In an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused, a bank employee who allegedly siphoned money of customers, for an FIR registered under Sections 316(2)<\/a>, 316(5)<\/a>, 318(2)<\/a> and 318(4)<\/a> of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023<\/a>, a Single Judge Bench of Rajesh S. Patil, J., rejected the application, holding that the physical presence of the accused for interrogation was necessary for completion of the investigation. Moreover, there was a possibility that she would pressure and threaten the witnesses and tamper with the evidence. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Bail granted to a man accused in Chandni Chowk currency trader Robbery and Murder case<\/p>\n

A bail application was filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail in connection with FIR registered at Police Station Shahdara, Delhi, under Sections 302<\/a>, 394<\/a>, and 120-B<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC) and Sections 25<\/a> and 27<\/a> of the Arms Act, 1959<\/a>. Vikas Mahajan, J., held that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000 and one surety bond of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Need for vigilance at entry point rather than indiscriminate denial of bail’; Bail granted<\/p>\n

In a bail application filed under Section 483<\/a> of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a>, by a foreign national in a cyber fraud case worth Rs 2.81 Crores, a Single Judge Bench of Anoop Chitkara, J., allowed the petition, holding that the accused was a first-time offender and did not require further pre-trial incarceration. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Bail granted to an alleged member of Lawrence Bishnoi Gang accused of shooting outside of Ex-MLA’s residence<\/p>\n

In an application filed by the applicant (‘accused’) under Section 483<\/a> of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a>, seeking regular bail in FIR registered under Sections 336<\/a>, 342<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and Sections 25<\/a>, 27<\/a>, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, 1959<\/a>, Sanjeev Narula, J., stated that whether the co-accused’s statements were sufficient to implicate the accused would be determined during trial, and at this juncture, the accused could be given benefit of doubt. Thus, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the accused did not have any criminal antecedents, the Court was inclined to enlarge the accused on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000 with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court on certain conditions. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Real women empowerment begins with right to live and move freely without fear’; Conviction of a man accused of harassment in public space, upheld<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by the accused under Section 397<\/a> read with Section 401<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) seeking to set aside the judgment dated 19-04-2024, Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., stated that if we truly aspire to uplift women, it was imperative that we first create an environment where they were safe, free from harassment, humiliation, and fear and that those who make the public spaces unsafe would be dealt with strictly. Until that happens, all discussions on women’s progress would remain superficial, since real empowerment begins with the right to live and move freely without fear. Thus, the Court stated that there was no patent illegality with the findings of the Trial Court and upheld the conviction of the accused. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | KeLSA authorised to lead awareness campaign against child marriages in Wayanad’s tribal communities<\/p>\n

In a suo motu petition concerning the practice of child marriage prevalent among the members of the tribal communities in Wayanad District, the division bench of Nitin Jamdar*, C.J and S. Manu, J. directed the State to implement the action plan by conducting awareness programs against child marriage in all upper primary, high, and higher secondary schools in Wayanad District within three months, with support from the Education and Tribal Departments. These departments are tasked with ensuring that every student attends at least one session per year. Additionally, similar awareness programs are to be conducted in tribal settlements within three months, with the involvement of the Tribal Department, Scheduled Tribe promoters, and para-legal volunteers. These programs are to be continued annually, utilizing the Gothra Vardhan Scheme to ensure better implementation. The Court also suggested screening films that address the issue of child marriage at various venues during these awareness programs and circulating posters highlighting the harmful effects of child marriage in tribal settlements and schools. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Attempt to commit unnatural sex with minor boy; Convict’s sentence reduced to imprisonment for a day<\/p>\n

In a criminal appeal filed by the convict, under Section 374(2)<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’), challenging the conviction order and sentence passed against him for the offences punishable under Sections 377<\/a> and 506<\/a> Part II of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), C.S. Sudha, J. highlighted that sexual offences against children and women are on the increase. Hence invoking the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958<\/a> (‘PO Act’) may send a wrong message to society at large. However, considering the age of the convict at the time of the commission of the offence and the nature of the offence made out from the materials on record, reduced the substantive sentence of 4 years imprisonment to imprisonment for a day till the rising of the Court and to payment of compensation of ₹25,000\/ to the minor boy under Section 357(3) CrPC. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Exemption requests of sexual violence victims deserve sensitivity unlike those of hardened criminals<\/p>\n

Two bail applications were filed by the petitioners pertaining to FIR registered under Sections 123, 70(2) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 6 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). Girish Kathpalia, J., adjourned the matter for further hearing and criticized the Trial Court’s insensitivity in insisting on medical verification of the prosecutrix’s illness on her first non-appearance and emphasized the need for a victim-centric approach. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Commenting on colleague’s hair that she must be using JCB to manage them, not sexual harassment; Industrial Court’s order set aside<\/p>\n

In the present case, the petition challenged judgment and order dated 1-7-2024 passed by the Member Industrial Court, Pune (‘the Industrial Court’) dismissing a case filed under provisions of Section 18<\/a> of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013<\/a> and report dated 30-9-2022 passed by the Internal Complaints Committee (‘the ICC’) of Respondent 2-HDFC Sales (P) Ltd. A Single Judge Bench of Sandeep V. Marne, J., stated that the incident where the petitioner commented about the complainant’s length and volume of her hair by saying that she must be using JCB to manage her hair, could not mean that it was made with an intent of causing any sexual harassment to the complainant. The Court held that the findings recorded by the Industrial Court were clearly perverse as it failed to consider the exact nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioner. The Court thus set aside the judgment and order dated 1-7-2024 passed by the Industrial Court. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | State directed to formulate guidelines for ensuring complainant’s anonymity from public domain during inquiry under POSH Act<\/p>\n

In an original petition filed under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, the petitioner challenged the order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) which dismissed the petitioner’s request to annul the inquiry report and halt further proceedings in a sexual harassment case, ruling that the challenge was premature and that he could avail of remedies only after the final order was issued, the division bench of A. Muhamed Mustaque and P. Krishna Kumar*,JJ. concluded that there was no jurisdictional error in the impugned order. However considering the repeated assertions made by the petitioner regarding his inability to controvert or contradict the complainant, the Court directed the disciplinary authority to ensure that the Internal Committee comply with the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013<\/a> (‘POSH Act’) and the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules, 1960 (‘ Kerala Civil Service Rules’). The Court emphasized that the petitioner must be given an opportunity to challenge the complainant’s testimony and present his own evidence before the Internal Committee. Further, noting that there is currently no mechanism in place to anonymise the details of the complainant who alleges sexual harassment or other atrocities during the various proceedings related to the inquiry, the Court directed the State to formulate necessary guidelines to anonymise the complainant’s details from the public domain during the inquiry proceedings under the POSH Act. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CRIMINAL TRIAL<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Trial of acid attack accused directed to be concluded in a month; Directions issued for compliance of higher courts’ order to conclude trials in time bound manner<\/p>\n

In a bail application filed under Section 483<\/a> of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNSS’), seeking grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR registered for offences punishable under Sections 326-A<\/a>\/392<\/a>\/394<\/a>\/397<\/a>\/120-B<\/a>\/411<\/a>\/34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., stated that in the present case such a prolonged delay in compliance with judicial directions defeated the very purpose of directing expeditious trial of a case. Even though the Court stated that it was not inclined to grant bail to the accused at this stage. However, the Court granted one last opportunity to the prosecution and the Trial Court to conclude trial within one month. The Court further passed directions for effective compliance of higher court’s order to conclude trials in time bound manner. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Expert’s report under S. 293 CrPC not a substitute for certificate under S. 65-B of Evidence Act’; Conviction in rape and murder case, set aside<\/p>\n

In a criminal appeal filed by the convict challenging his conviction and sentence imposed under Sections 3021, 376-A2 and 2013 IPC, the division bench of Raja Vijayaraghavan V and P. V. Balakrishnan*, JJ., held that the report of an expert obtained under Section 293<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) cannot be considered as a substitute for a certificate under Section 65-B<\/a> of the Evidence Act, 1872<\/a> which is used to prove the validity of electronic evidence. The admissibility of a Section 293 CrPC report simply means that the report can be read as evidence of its contents, but it does not automatically validate any attached electronic media. Therefore, while the expert’s statement may be authoritative, it is not equivalent to the statutory certificate that authorizes the court to treat the DVD as evidence of the video’s contents. Hence, the Court set aside the conviction and sentence of the convict and remanded the case to the Trial Court for the purpose of adducing the electronic records available in the case, as per law. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | Woman though can’t commit rape, but can be held liable for abetment to rape under Section 109 IPC<\/p>\n

In a Criminal Revision filed under Section 397<\/a> read with Section 401<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (CrPC) against Additional Sessions Judge’s order wherein charges were framed against them under Sections 376<\/a> read with 34<\/a>, 190<\/a>, and 506-II<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC), a single-judge bench of Pramod Kumar Agrawal, J., modified the order and directed the trial court to frame charges under Section 376 read with 109 IPC instead of Section 376 read with 34 IPC, while keeping the remaining charges intact. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CYBER CRIME<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Indiscriminate freezing of bank accounts slammed; Policy reform called for in cyber-crime investigations<\/p>\n

A petition was filed by aggrieved by Neelkanth Pharma Logistics Pvt Ltd (petitioner) the way its account has been frozen by respondent No.2 Bank (HDFC Bank) arguing that such an indiscriminate freeze had significantly disrupted its business operations. Manoj Jain, J., recommended that the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, develop a uniform policy and standard operating procedures (SOPs) in collaboration with all stakeholders, including State\/UT law enforcement agencies, emphasizing that a bank account should not be entirely frozen solely due to a suspicious transaction unless the account holder is proven to be complicit in a crime. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DEFAMATION<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | No early hearing of RSS Member’s plea for quashing proceedings; Malviya undertakes to seek adjournment of Trial<\/p>\n

In an application under Section 528<\/a> of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNSS’) for speedy hearing filed by Santanu Sinha, a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (‘RSS’) member, who was being prosecuted for criminal defamation against Amit Malviya (‘respondent 2’), a BJP politician, President of I.T. Cell, Co-In charge of West Bengal Chapter, regarding a Facebook post, a Single Judge Bench of Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ., considering Malviya’s undertaking that he shall seek an adjournment in the complaint case before the Trial Court and request the Trial Court for adjournment till after a hearing in the present petition for quashing the proceedings, disposed of the plea for early hearing. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

INVESTIGATION<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Does not affect investigative prerogatives’; Order to preserve Call Detail Records, location data of CBI officials and independent witnesses, upheld<\/p>\n

The present petition was filed under Section 397<\/a> read with Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’), challenging the order dated 12-07-2023, passed by Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi (‘Trial Court’), whereby, it was directed to preserve Call Detail Records (‘CDR’) and location data of CBI officials and independent witnesses in connection with FIR registered under Section 120-B<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and Section 7<\/a> of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<\/a>. Chandra Dhari Singh, J., found no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, as it merely directed the preservation of potential evidence without affecting the prosecution’s case or investigative prerogatives. The impugned order was well within the Trial Court’s discretionary powers and did not confer any unwarranted advantage to the accused at this stage. Accordingly, the Court upheld the impugned order. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

JUVENILES<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Juvenile tried as an adult cannot face joint trial with adult accused under JJ Act<\/p>\n

A criminal revision petition was filed by the petitioner, CCL ‘K,’ challenging the order dated 23-05-2022, passed by the Trial Court which dismissed his application under Section 23<\/a> of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015<\/a> (‘JJ Act’ and sought to stop the ongoing joint proceedings with the adult accused in connection with FIR registered under Sections 186, 353, 302 and 34 IPC. Anish Dayal, J., quashed the Trial Court’s order dated 23-05-2022 and directed that the petitioner’s trial be conducted separately from that of the adult co-accused and held that the Trial Court erred in permitting joint proceedings of the petitioner with the adult accused. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | No unqualified right for the complainant to be heard at every stage of bail proceedings under JJ Act, 2015<\/p>\n

A criminal revision petition was filed under Section 102<\/a> of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015<\/a> (“JJ Act”) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 16-09-2023 (“impugned order”) passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-01 (Children Court), Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (“ASJ”) in criminal appeal whereby the appeal against two orders dated 28th October, 2022 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board-III, Delhi (hereinafter “JJB”) was dismissed. Chandra Dhari Singh, J., held that upheld the impugned order dated 16-09-2023 passed by the ASJ in Criminal Appeal as it correctly upheld the findings of JJB and no jurisdictional error, procedural irregularity or legal infirmity was demonstrated that would warrant interference by this Court. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

NDPS<\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | FSL report must be obtained on priority, preferably within 60 days<\/p>\n

In an application for bail under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985<\/a> (NDPS Act) on the ground that the quantity of contraband recovered is below the commercial threshold, a single-judge bench of Anil Kumar Upman, J., granted the bail and directed the Director General of Police, Jaipur, to ensure that the FSL reports is obtained from the FSL on priority basis preferably within 60 days, as life and liberty are priceless and they can’t be compromises except with the sanction of law. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Drug\/psychotropic addiction is quasi-pandemic; Statutory rules to be followed strictly without deviation<\/p>\n

In the present case, four bail applications arose in connection with a case for offences punishable under Sections 8(c)<\/a>, 21(c)<\/a>, 22(c)<\/a>, and 29<\/a> of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985<\/a> (‘the NDPS Act’) read with Sections 465<\/a>, 468<\/a>, 471<\/a>, and 473<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a>. A Single Judge Bench of Milind N. Jadhav, J., stated that in the present case, the non-compliance of the provisions left a lacuna which formed a reason for grant of bail and if the statute required the statutory Authority to act in a particular manner, it was not open to the said Authority to follow a different procedure or regime contrary to the established and prevalent Rules\/procedure. Thus, the Court directed that all the four applicants-accused persons should be released on bail. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

GUJARAT HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Nothing substantial in trial, matter adjourned almost 78 times’; Bail granted to accused in NDPS case<\/p>\n

In a regular bail application filed by the accused under Section 439<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a>, in connection with an FIR registered under Sections 8(C)<\/a>, 20(b)(ii)(C)<\/a>, and 29<\/a> of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985<\/a>, a Single Judge Bench of Gita Gopi, J., allowed the application holding that the case was fit for exercising discretion in favour of the accused due to the fundamental right guaranteed under article 21<\/a> of the constitution<\/a>, the prolonged incarceration of the accused and the blink hope of speedy trial. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Person becomes zombie upon using narcotic drugs’; Bail denied to NDPS accused allegedly caught with 290 grams of heroin<\/p>\n

In a regular bail application filed by the accused in an FIR registered under Sections 21<\/a> and 25<\/a> of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985<\/a>, (‘NDPS’) and Sections 379<\/a> and 411<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), a Single Judge Bench of Sandeep Moudgil, J., dismissed the application holding that the accused actively indulged in the business of selling narcotic substances and was found in possession of a commercial quantity of narcotic drugs, thus, the rigours of Section 37 of NDPS Act would apply. Thus, considering the negative impacts of drug use, the Court stated that, as the guardian of its citizens, it was essential for it to take decisive action against such offenders, especially when the lives and futures of the nation’s youth were at stake. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

POCSO<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Touching lips or lying next to victim not sufficient for POCSO charge without ‘sexual intent’<\/span><\/p>\n

A criminal revision petition was filed by the petitioner, a minor (MRP) under Section 438<\/a> read with Section 442<\/a> of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (BNSS), challenging the order dated 30-07-2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in an FIR under Section 354<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC) and Section 10<\/a> of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012<\/a> (POCSO Act) registered at Police Station Okhla Industrial Area, Delhi, based on allegations of inappropriate contact with a minor girl by her paternal uncle. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., modified the impugned order by upholding the charge under Section 354 of IPC while setting aside the charge under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, holding that the allegations did not establish the essential ingredient of sexual intent required for aggravated sexual assault. Read more HERE<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT<\/span> | Grabbing breasts, breaking minor’s Pajama string not attempt to rape, but ‘aggravated sexual assault’: Summoning order, modified<\/p>\n

In a criminal revision filed against the summoning order passed by Special Judge in complaint case, whereby the accused 1 and 2 have been summoned to face trial for charge under Sections 376<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) read with Section 18<\/a> of Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act, 2012<\/a> (‘POCSO Act’) , and accused 3 (Father of accused 2) was summoned for charge under Sections 504 and 506 IPC, the single judge bench of Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. while modifying the impugned order, held that mere fact that accused 1 and 2 grabbed the breasts of the victim and one of them broke the string of her pyjama and tried to drag her beneath the culvert and in the meanwhile on interference of passersby the accused persons fled away from the spot leaving the victim behind, is not sufficient to hold that a case of Section 376, 511 IPC or Section 376 IPC read with Section 18 of POCSO Act has been made out against the accused persons. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE<\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Teachers should not be under constant threat of criminal charges’: Preliminary inquiry before registering criminal cases against educators, mandated<\/p>\n

In a matter wherein, a teacher charged with offences punishable under Section 118(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (‘BNS’) and Section 75<\/a> of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015<\/a> (‘JJ Act’), P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J. while granting bail to the accused teacher, held that any complaint received against a teacher in connection with their activities within an educational institution must undergo a mandatory preliminary inquiry, as outlined under Section 173(3)(i), before any case is registered. The Court further stated that a notice may be issued to the teacher, if necessary, to conduct the preliminary inquiry, but the teacher should not be arrested during this process. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot transfer a case from one Court or another on application or suo motu under Section 450 BNSS<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Section 528<\/a> of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNSS’) challenging the order dated 07-06-2024, whereby a complaint case was transferred by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, West Delhi, Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J., stated that under Section 410<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) and Section 450 of BNSS, the power conferred upon the Chief Judicial Magistrate was only administrative in nature. The Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate could not “transfer” a case from one Court or another upon an application being moved or suo motu. The Court further stated that Respondent 2 should be at liberty to move a proper application before Principal District and Sessions Judge under Section 448 of BNSS for transfer of case from one Court to another. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

QUASHMENT OF PROCEEDINGS\/ FIR<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Air Force officer’s plea to quash domestic violence case filed by wife, rejected<\/p>\n

A petition was filed by husband (petitioner 1) and his parents (petitioner 2 and 3) seeking the quashing of a domestic violence complaint initiated by respondent was dismissed. Neena Bansal Krishna, J., held that the petitioners failed to establish any valid grounds for quashing the complaint under Section 12<\/a> of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005<\/a>. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

GAUHATI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Mere breach of a promise cannot give rise to criminal prosecution’; Criminal proceedings against doctor accused of cheating man of Rs 2 Lakhs, quashed<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Section 482<\/a> read with Sections 401<\/a> and 397<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) seeking quashing of the order, whereby the Trial Court took cognizance of the offences under Sections 420<\/a> and 406<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) against the accused as well as the criminal proceedings pending therein, a Single Judge Bench of Kaushik Goswami, J., allowed the petition holding that there seemed to be no misappropriation or fraudulent or dishonest intention of the accused at the beginning of the transaction thus, no case under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC could be made out. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | “No ‘conscious possession’ of ammunition”: FIR quashed against pilot trainee but imposed cost for lack of vigilance<\/p>\n

A petition was filed by the petitioner, a commercial pilot trainee under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a> seeking quashing of FIR registered at under Section 25<\/a> of the Arms Act, 1959<\/a>. Sanjeev Narula, J., quashed the FIR and imposed payment of cost of Rs 25,000, as no case for prosecution was made out and the petitioner’s lack of vigilance led to unnecessary involvement of the state machinery, which could have been avoided with greater care. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Every action disliked by a class may not lead to outrage of religious sentiments’; Case against Kailash Kher for hurting religious feelings in Lord Shiva song, quashed<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by the famous singer Kailash Kher seeking quashing of a complaint registered against him under Sections 295-A<\/a> and 298<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) for singing in a Lord Shiva song with a specific depiction, the Division Bench of Bharati Dangre* and Shyam C. Chandak, JJ., allowed the petition holding that merely because Kailash Kher was singing the song being surrounded by a large number of people who independently performed their roles assigned to them, the ingredients of Section 295A of IPC were not made out. Similarly, regarding Section 298 of IPC, the Court held that the complainant failed to make out even a prima facie case of his religious feelings being wounded with a deliberate intention attributed to Kailash Kher. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | Misuse of Advocate-Client Relationship | FIR in Rape allegations against Advocate refused to be quashed<\/p>\n

In an application filed, by an advocate, under Section 482<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (CrPC) seeking quashment of FIR registered against him under Section 376(2)(n)<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC), a single-judge bench of G. S. Ahluwalia, J., dismissed the application as the misuse of a professional relationship by an advocate to exploit his client under coercion is a serious offense that cannot be ignored. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Miserably failed to act as quasi-judicial authorities’; Bribery case quashed against police officer, remanded it to Appellate Authority<\/p>\n

A petition was filed by a police constable, convicted of receiving Rs. 13 Lakhs in bribe, seeking quashing of the Disciplinary Authority’s order stopping three annual increments with permanent effect, the Appellate Authority’s order dismissing his appeal, the Revisional Authority’s order dismissing his revision plea. A Single Judge Bench of Jagmohan Bansal, J., allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders, holding that the authorities miserably failed to act as quasi-judicial authorities as they passed orders mechanically without recording any reasons therein. The Court also noted that despite serious allegations of recovery of 10 kg ganja and bribery, the State did not initiate criminal proceedings against either of the parties. Read HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Obscene message sent to female colleague on WhatsApp was unintentional’; FIR against retired professor after he claimed to be suffering from mental illness, quashed<\/p>\n

The present petition was filed for quashing the FIR registered at Malabar Hill Police Station on 13-12-2022 under Section 354-D<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and Section 67 of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008<\/a> and the consequent proceedings. The Division Bench of Sarang V. Kotwal and S.M. Modak, JJ., quashed the proceedings against the petitioner as Respondent 1 after coming to know that the petitioner unintentionally sent her an obscene message on WhatsApp while he was suffering from a mental illness, decided to withdraw her allegations. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

GUJARAT HIGH COURT<\/span> | FIR refused to be quashed against Sadhvi accused of duping man of Rs 1.25 crores<\/p>\n

In an application filed by a female monk, Sadhviji Jayshrigiri Guru Jagdishgiri (‘Sadhvi’), seeking quashing of FIR and proceedings filed against her under Sections 406<\/a>, 420<\/a>, and 506(1)<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), a Single Judge Bench of J. C. Doshi, J., dismissed the application, holding that considering the incomplete and hazy facts coming from the record indicated that further investigation was required in the matter. Further, considering that the total amount that was duped as per the FIR was around Rs. 5 Crores, the Court stated that it was not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’). Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Parens Patriae obligates Court to ensure justice not reduced to mere private settlement’; Abetment to suicide case refused to be quashed on basis of compromise<\/p>\n

In a petition filed under Section 528<\/a> of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNSS’), seeking quashing of FIR registered under Sections 306<\/a>, 506<\/a>, 34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), on the ground of compromise between the parties, a Single Judge Bench of Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., rejected the petition, reiterating that abetment to suicide was not a compoundable offence. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Section 482 of CrPC cannot be used as an instrument to short circuit prosecution and bring its sudden death’; Petition seeking to quash FIRs, dismissed<\/p>\n

In the petitions filed under Section 482<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) seeking to quash the FIR registered under Sections 354<\/a>, 506<\/a> and 509<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), Neena Bansal Krishna, J., stated that no doubt judicial process, should not be an instrument of operation or needless harassment yet at the same time, this Section could not be used as an instrument by the accused to short circuit a prosecution and bring about its sudden death. In the present case, the Court stated that there was nothing on record to suggest that the FIRs were vexatious or were based on false facts. Thus, the Court stated that the circumstances as discussed did not justify the quashing of the FIRs and accordingly dismissed the present petitions. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Patriarchal to say that woman must foresee marriage problems solely because she is elder to her partner’; FIR against a man accused of rape on pretext of marriage refused to be quashed<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by the petitioner (‘accused’) seeking to quash the FIR registered under Sections 376<\/a> and 377<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., stated that the submission by the accused that a woman must assume additional responsibility and foresee marriage-related difficulties solely because she was elder to her partner was based on a patriarchal and legally flawed premise. Given the prima-facie material on record and the gravity of the allegations, the Court found no justification for quashing the FIR at this stage, and accordingly, dismissed the present petition. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

STAY<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Order directing registration of FIR against former SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and other SEBI, BSE officials, stayed<\/p>\n

A Single Judge Bench of Shivkumar Dige, J., stayed the order of a special court to register FIR against former SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and other SEBI and Bombay Stock Exchange (‘BSE’) officials in connection with a listing fraud case. The Court stayed the order for four weeks and stated that the order by the special court was passed mechanically without going into the details and without attributing any specific role to the accused persons. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | Demolition drive on accused’s properties stayed till next date of hearing in Beawar Sexual Exploitation Case<\/p>\n

In a petition challenging the demolition notices based on alleged illegal construction issued against the petitioners, following the arrest of certain accused individuals including both of the petitioner’s grandsons allegedly involved in sexually exploiting minor girls, a single-judge bench of Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J., granted interim protection to the petitioners by maintaining the status quo, ensuring that no demolition takes place until next date of hearing. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT<\/span> | “FIR against Arnab Goswami a tool for intimidating & silencing independent journalism”; Stay application allowed<\/p>\n

In a petition filed by journalist Arnab Goswami, seeking stay and later quashment of FIR registered at Police Station Ambamata, Udaipur, under Section 153-A IPC (promoting enmity between different groups), in response to news concerning the demolition of a temple in Rajgarh, a single-judge bench of Farjand Ali, J., allowed the stay application and directed to not take coercive measures against the petitioner in connection with FIR until the disposal of the main petition. In the instant matter, the Petitioner was named in FIR registered at Police Station Ambamata, Udaipur, under Section 153-A IPC (Promoting enmity between different groups). The FIR was filed in response to news reporting by Republic Bharat, a Hindi news channel under the Republic Media Network, concerning the demolition of a temple in Rajgarh, Rajasthan. The Petitioner contended that he was neither involved in the editorial decision-making nor had any role in the telecast or debates related to the news reported by Republic Bharat, a Hindi news channel under the Republic Media Network. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Top criminal cases on quashing of proceedings, arrest, bail, acquittal, and more.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":344918,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[45673,70549],"tags":[30948,4561,75507,40876,79632,2664,79644,24773,80111,36803,78833,79356,80494,48756,3156,7841,23204,44391,2572,80493,2850],"class_list":["post-344908","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-columns-for-roundup","category-topic-wise-roundup","tag-abetment-to-suicide","tag-acquittal","tag-amit-malviya","tag-arnab-goswami","tag-ashish-chanchlani","tag-Bail","tag-beawar-sexual-exploitation-case","tag-bribery","tag-chandni-chowk-currency-trader-robbery-and-murder-case","tag-cyber-crime","tag-indias-got-latent","tag-juveniles","tag-lawrence-bishnoi","tag-madhabi-puri-buch","tag-murder","tag-ndps","tag-pocso","tag-posh","tag-Rape","tag-seemapuri-robbery","tag-sexual_harassment"],"yoast_head":"\nCriminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025\" \/>\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\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CRIMINAL LAW ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-04-02T09:30:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-04-02T09:31:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"533\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"CRIMINAL LAW ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"29 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\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/\",\"name\":\"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-04-02T09:30:11+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-04-02T09:31:38+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.webp\",\"width\":800,\"height\":533,\"caption\":\"criminal law Roundup\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CRIMINAL LAW ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025\"}]},{\"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025 | SCC Times","description":"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025","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\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CRIMINAL LAW ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025","og_description":"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-04-02T09:30:11+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-04-02T09:31:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":800,"height":533,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"CRIMINAL LAW ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"29 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/","name":"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.webp","datePublished":"2025-04-02T09:30:11+00:00","dateModified":"2025-04-02T09:31:38+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Criminal Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.webp","width":800,"height":533,"caption":"criminal law Roundup"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/criminal-law-roundup-recap-of-the-top-criminal-cases-march-2025\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CRIMINAL LAW ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the top criminal cases from March 2025"}]},{"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/criminal-law-Roundup.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":343105,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/delhi-high-court-upholds-acquittal-seemapuri-robbery-kidnapping-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":344908,"position":0},"title":"Delhi High Court upholds acquittal in Seemapuri robbery and kidnapping case citing lack of evidence","author":"Arunima","date":"March 6, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"In criminal jurisprudence, the standard of proof required to sustain a conviction is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is significantly higher than the preponderance of probabilities applicable in civil cases.","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\/2024\/02\/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\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":256949,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/11\/subway-restaurant-robbery\/","url_meta":{"origin":344908,"position":1},"title":"Subway Restaurant Robbery; Canada Court holds Appellate Court cannot not mechanically limit scope of re-trial to a particular theory of liability on a single charge","author":"Editor","date":"November 11, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of Canada: The Bench comprising of Wagner C.J. and Moldaver, C\u00f4t\u00e9, Brown, Rowe, Martin and Kasirer JJ., held that appellate courts cannot always limit the scope of a new trial to a particular theory of liability on a single criminal charge. While setting aside the order of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Canada SC","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":380615,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/09\/criminal-law-roundup-march-2026-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":344908,"position":2},"title":"Criminal Law March 2026 Roundup: Supreme Court and High Courts on Advocate Assault, Acquittal in 23-Year-old Family Murder, Misuse of POCSO in teenage relationships; and More","author":"Malika Bhola","date":"April 9, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories of March 2026 on Criminal Law from Supreme Court and all High Courts","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Criminal Law Roundup March 2026","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Criminal-Law-Roundup-March-2026-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Criminal-Law-Roundup-March-2026-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Criminal-Law-Roundup-March-2026-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Criminal-Law-Roundup-March-2026-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":354519,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/25\/delhi-high-court-mere-threat-not-constitute-criminal-intimidation\/","url_meta":{"origin":344908,"position":3},"title":"\u2018Mere threat without intention to cause alarm does not constitute criminal intimidation\u2019: Delhi High Court upholds acquittal in POCSO case","author":"Niyati","date":"July 25, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court stated that if the minor left immediately on being allegedly sexually assaulted by pushing away the accused where was the occasion for the accused to extend threat. The sequence of events, as narrated by the minor, does not clearly establish that the alleged threat was made with the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"mere threats not Criminal Intimidation","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/mere-threats-not-Criminal-Intimidation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/mere-threats-not-Criminal-Intimidation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/mere-threats-not-Criminal-Intimidation.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/mere-threats-not-Criminal-Intimidation.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":365826,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/06\/legal-roundup-criminal-law-october-2025-roundup-bail-murder-women-offences-conviction-acquittal-scc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":344908,"position":4},"title":"Criminal Law October 2025: A Dive into the Month’s Biggest Criminal Cases and Laws","author":"Editor","date":"November 6, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Covering all the important criminal law cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court as well as the legislative updates, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, latest legal updates in criminal law and links to other roundups.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Criminal Law October 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-25-5.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-25-5.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-25-5.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-25-5.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":222170,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/11\/16\/bom-hc-law-on-double-presumption-of-innocence-in-favour-of-accused-acquitted-by-trial-court-reiterated\/","url_meta":{"origin":344908,"position":5},"title":"Bom HC | Law on double presumption of innocence in favour of accused acquitted by trial court — Reiterated","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 16, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0K.R. Shriram, J., while dismissing the criminal appeal filed by the State against the order of the trial court acquitting the accused of charge under Section 392 of Penal Code, 1860, reiterated that there is a double presumption of innocence in favour of the accused who has been\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\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/344908","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\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=344908"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/344908\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/344918"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=344908"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=344908"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=344908"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}