{"id":380615,"date":"2026-04-09T15:00:15","date_gmt":"2026-04-09T09:30:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=380615"},"modified":"2026-04-09T15:42:52","modified_gmt":"2026-04-09T10:12:52","slug":"criminal-law-roundup-march-2026-scc-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/09\/criminal-law-roundup-march-2026-scc-times\/","title":{"rendered":"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"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Criminal Law March 2026 Roundup brings together some of the most significant Supreme Court and High Court rulings on POCSO misuse among teenagers, acquittal of Baba Gurmeet Singh, attack on advocate, notice on CBI revision challenging discharge of Arvind Kejriwal, plea of juvenility and much more<\/p>\n

KEY ACQUITTALS<\/h2>\n

Allahabad High Court| “Sad commentary on our criminal justice delivery system”: Man acquitted after 23 years in jail for wife, children’s murder<\/p>\n

In Raees v. State of U.P.<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a>, the Court allowed the appeal, holding that the prosecution’s evidence did not conclusively implicate and prove that the offence was committed by the convict. Read more HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

Madras High Court| Misuse of POCSO in teenage relationships; Conviction under POCSO Act set aside as age of victim unproved<\/p>\n

In Mahesh v. State of T.N.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Mad 2258<\/a>, the Court held that the trial court erred in relying on inadmissible xerox copies to determine the victim’s age, set aside the conviction under Section 366<\/a> IPC<\/a> and Sections 5(l)<\/a>\/6<\/a> POCSO Act<\/a>, and acquitted the appellant, highlighting the misuse of POCSO in adolescent consensual relationships. Read more HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

Punjab & Haryana High Court |Explained | Why Baba Gurmeet Singh was Acquitted in the Ram Chander Chhatrapati Murder Case<\/p>\n

In Baba Gurmeet Singh v. CBI<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine P&H 3217<\/a>, the Court reiterated that where two possibilities, one of commission of crime and the other of innocence, are reasonably possible, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt. Considering the lack of credibility of eyewitnesses and investigative lapses, the Court acquitted Baba Gurmeet Singh. Read more HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

Also Read:<\/span> Explained | Why Allahabad HC stayed criminal proceedings against The Wire MD Siddharth Varadarajan in Barabanki Mosque Demolition Case<\/a><\/p>\n

ASSAULT<\/h2>\n

Supreme Court| ‘Tarnishing the Profession’: Barabanki Bar Members condemned for Attacking Advocate Representing Accused in Toll Plaza Advocate Assault Case<\/p>\n

In Vishvjeet v. State of U.P.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 431<\/a>, wherein several employees (petitioners) working at the Gotona Bara Toll Plaza on the Lucknow-Sultanpur Highway, Barabanki, were arrested for allegedly assaulting an advocate (complainant) over refusal to pay toll; the Supreme Court grimly noted that members of the bar at Barabanki had indulged into hooliganism against the advocate who had filed the bail application on behalf of the petitioners. Read about advocate assault case<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BAIL<\/h2>\n

Punjab & Haryana High Court | Inside order denying bail to YouTuber accused of sharing sensitive information with Pakistan<\/p>\n

In a bail petition titled Jyoti Rani alias Jyoti Malhotra v. State of Haryana<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine P&H 3596<\/a>, filed by a YouTuber having a channel by the name of “Travel-with-Jo” under Section 483<\/a>, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (BNSS) alleged to have contacts with the operatives of Pakistan Intelligence Agency through social media platform, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the offences involved were of very serious nature of offence, thus, refused to grant bail to the Youtuber. Read bail to YouTuber accused of sharing sensitive information with Pakistan denied<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Kerala High Court| Bail set aside for Non-Compliance with Mandatory S. 15A(3)<\/a> SC\/ST Act<\/a> Notice in Mob Lynching Case<\/p>\n

In State of Kerala v. Anu<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Ker 3693<\/a>, while challenging a common order granting regular bail to several accused in a mob-lynching case, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the bail granted in mob lynching case as it did not comply with the mandatory notice required under Section 15-A(3)<\/a>, SC\/ST Act<\/a> to the victim’s dependent which rendered it non est in the eye of the law. The Court cancelled the bail bonds and directed surrender. Read about denial of bail in mob lynching case<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Punjab and Haryan High Court| Bail denied to YouTuber accused of sharing sensitive information with Pakistan<\/p>\n

In Jyoti Rani alias Jyoti Malhotra v. State of Haryana<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine P&H 3596<\/a>, the Court noted that there had been an effort on the Youtuber’s part to delete information about conversations and transmission of information to the operatives of Pakistan Intelligence Agency. Considering the presumption of Section 4, Secrets Act, the Court held that Youtuber’s involvement in the commission of crime was prima facie established. Further, the Court stated that he was not entitled to bail since the allegations against her were for the commission of very serious nature of offence, that is, indulging in anti-national activities and passing on sensitive information to the neighboring country. Thus, the Court dismissed the petition. Read more<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CULPABLE HOMICIDE<\/h2>\n

Bombay High Court| Conviction converted from murder to culpable homicide, “continuous provocation” from tobacco-addicted brother recognised<\/p>\n

In Hemant Vasant Devrukhkar v. State of Maharashtra, 2026 SCC OnLine Bom 2011<\/a><\/span><\/span> , the Court held that the case was covered by Exception 1 of Section 300<\/a> IPC<\/a>. The Court noted that the deceased’s continuous addiction to tobacco, his abusive behaviour, and his assault on the appellant on the night of the incident amounted to provocation sufficient to deprive the appellant of self-control. Accordingly, the conviction under Section 302<\/a> IPC<\/a> was set aside and modified to Section 304(I)<\/a> IPC<\/a> with a reduced sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment. Read Conviction converted from murder to culpable homicide<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DISCHARGE<\/h2>\n

Delhi High Court| Notice on CBI revision challenging discharge of Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and others<\/p>\n

In CBI v. Kuldeep Singh<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 887<\/a>, the Court issued notice on the criminal revision filed by the CBI challenging the trial court’s order discharging former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and 21 others in the Delhi Excise Policy case. Read Notice on CBI revision<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DOWRY<\/h2>\n

Supreme Court| Quarrelling with daughter-in-law does not constitute a criminal offence; FIR cannot sustain charges under IPC and Dowry Act<\/p>\n

In Dr Sushil Kumar Purbey v. State of Patna<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 338<\/a>, the Supreme Court held that the lone allegations against the father and mother-in-law, limited to quarrelling with the estranged daughter-in-law, do not amount to offences under Sections 341<\/a>, 323<\/a>, 498-A<\/a>, 34<\/a> IPC<\/a> or Sections 3<\/a> and 4<\/a> of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961<\/a>. Read quarrelling with daughter-in-law not a criminal offence<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE<\/h2>\n

Supreme Court| Court not to conduct mini-trial; strong and cogent evidence sufficient to summon additional accused<\/p>\n

In Mohd. Kaleem v. State of U.P.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 397<\/a>, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgments and allowed the summoning of additional accused persons. The Court held that at the stage of exercising power under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a>, the Court should not conduct a detailed evaluation of credibility or insist on proof sufficient for conviction, and minor inconsistencies or absence of documentary corroboration cannot by themselves justify refusal to summon additional accused. Read Exercising Power Under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> case<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

Supreme Court | Absence of signature on charge curable irregularity, de novo trial not justified unless failure of justice shown<\/p>\n

In Sandeep Yadav v. Satish<\/span> 2026 SCC OnLine SC 474<\/a>, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order directing a fresh trial and restored the trial court’s order, holding that where the accused had full knowledge of the charges and actively participated in the trial, defects such as absence of signature on the charge constituted a curable procedural irregularity and did not vitiate the trial unless failure of justice was demonstrated. The Court further held that a de novo trial could not be ordered merely on technical grounds, particularly when the trial had substantially progressed and no real miscarriage of justice was shown. Read No De Novo Trial Unless Failure of Justice case<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Bombay High Court |Trial vitiates on non-examination of scientific experts whose reports were relied upon<\/p>\n

In State of Maharashtra v. Tejas<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Bom 1870<\/a>, the Court quashed the conviction holding that a trial vitiates on failure to examine scientific experts whose reports are relied upon as it causes a failure of justice. Read non-examination of scientific experts’ report relied on<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court| Repeated summoning of minor victims in POCSO trials discouraged<\/p>\n

In Minor Child K v. State (NCT of Delhi)<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1137<\/a>, the Court reiterated key protections for “vulnerable witnesses.” The Court emphasized that child victims of sexual offences require a sensitive and protective approach throughout investigation and trial. It highlighted that the POCSO Act mandates child-friendly procedures to prevent repeated summoning and avoid re-victimisation or additional trauma. The Court further noted that measures such as video conferencing should be used to reduce direct exposure to the accused and ease psychological stress. During bail proceedings, once the victim’s views are recorded, their repeated presence should not be required. Finally, the Court stressed that all trial courts must strictly adhere to existing statutory provisions, as well as Supreme Court and High Court guidelines governing the treatment of vulnerable witnesses. Read about vulnerable witnesses<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi High Court| “Mechanical” rejection of plea for premature release of Bangladeshi convict set aside<\/p>\n

In Asif v. State (NCT of Delhi)<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 899<\/a>, while hearing a petition under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, the Court held that a rejection of plea for premature leave primarily on the gravity of offence without considering the petitioner’s custodial records or rehabilitative indicators was unsustainable and liable to be set aside. Read about mechanical rejection of plea HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PLEA OF JUVENILITY<\/h2>\n

Bombay High Court |Plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage; Delay in raising claim not a valid ground for rejection<\/p>\n

In Sheraz Ahmed v. State of Maharashtra<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Bom 1754<\/a>, the Court held that the plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage of the proceedings and that delay in raising such a claim cannot justify rejection. Read about plea of juvenility<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

WIFE’S MURDER<\/h2>\n

Madras High Court| Strained marriage and alcohol addiction not enough to presume husband’s guilt in wife’s murder<\/p>\n

In M. Senthilmurugan v. State of T.N.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Mad 2922<\/a>, wherein a man was accused of murdering his wife, the Court noted that the nonexamination of the deceased’s son, who was a crucial witness, and the absence of evidence to establish the “last seen theory” created serious gaps in the prosecution’s case. The Court further observed that strained marital relations and the accused’s addiction to alcohol could not, by themselves, justify a presumption of guilt. Emphasising that even strong suspicion cannot substitute proof, the Court concluded that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and accordingly acquitted the accused of the conviction under Section 302<\/a> IPC<\/a>. Read more<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Also Read:<\/span> Bombay HC converts murder conviction to culpable homicide on provocation | SCC Times<\/a><\/p>\n

Also Read:<\/span> Del HCquashes 307 IPC<\/a> case after settlement | SCC Times<\/a><\/p>\n

POSH<\/h2>\n

Kerala High Court| ICC report set aside due to non-service of complaint copy on delinquent<\/p>\n

In a writ petition X v. Kerala Social Security Mission<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Ker 3915<\/a>,alleging violation of the principles of natural justice during an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) enquiry, specifically, the failure to furnish a copy of the complaint to the delinquent employee, denial of an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, and non-compliance with the mandatory procedure under Section 11(1)<\/a>, Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013<\/a> (POSH Act) and Rule 7, POSH Rules, the Court held that the non-service of the complaint constituted a breach of natural justice and of POSH Act and Rules. Read about enquiry under POSH<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PRISON AND PRISONERS<\/h2>\n

Supreme Court| Addressing overcrowding in prisons, directions issued for expansion and uniform governance of Open Correctional Institutions<\/p>\n

In a writ petition titled Suhas Chakma v. Union of India<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 317<\/a>, the Supreme Court held that Open Correctional Institutions (OCIs) embody this constitutional promise by recognizing that trust, responsibility and graded liberty are essential for meaningful reform. Read more<\/span> HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

RAPE<\/h2>\n

Madhya Pradesh High Court| ‘Unlikely that 12-year relationship was based on False Promise of Marriage’: Rape Case quashed<\/p>\n

Examining whether allegations of false promise to marriage in long-term relationships could vitiate consent under the provisions governing sexual offences in X v. State of Madhya Pradesh<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine MP 3188<\/a>, the Madhya Pradesh High Court reiterated that for such a claim to succeed, the promise must be false from inception, made in bad faith, and shown to have directly influenced the woman’s decision to engage in the sexual act. Read more HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

Also read:<\/span> Bombay High Court: Life Sentence for father in Minor’s Rape case | SCC Times<\/a><\/p>\n

ALSO READ<\/h2>\n