- Supreme Court of India
Domestic Violence Case against husband being quasi criminal case, so personal attendance of husband not mandatory. Impounded passport be released.
- Supreme Court of India
Difference Between Section 156(3) CrPC and Section 175(3) BNSS
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Accused can be held liable for Section 498A IPC, despite there is no demand of dowry and cruelty and harassment is proved.
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Section 34 IPC - Conviction of Accused is not proper just because accused was present on place of incidents.
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Whether wife can claim maintenance from second husband without giving divorce to first husband?
- Supreme Court of India
Every quarrel or conduct causing annoyance may not amount to the offence of "cruelty" Under Section 498A IPC
- Supreme Court of India
Personal Law cannot supersede Welfare of Child in Child Custody Case
- Supreme Court of India
Supreme Court set aside the remission of 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case and issued detailed guidelines for consideration Remission of Sentences.
- Supreme Court of India
A notice of demand made under the N.I. Act demand shall not be omnibus, there must be a clear demand for the cheque amount lest notice will be invalid.
- Supreme Court of India
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India issued Direction to subordinate courts for speedy disposal of Civil Cases.
- Supreme Court of India
A five-judge Bench held that fundamental rights can be enforced not only against the State, but also against non-State actors.
- Supreme Court of India
Re Article 370 of Constitution of India. The Court held that Article 370 was only intended as a transitory provision and was temporary in character and thus, the President was empowered to abrogate it.
- Supreme Court of India
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India refused to recognize same sex marriage & held it to be invalid and unconstitutional.
- Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court in September held that judgment Subramanian Swamy v. Director CBI, 2014 which struck down Section 6A of the 1946 Delhi Special Police Establishment Act (DSPE Act), would have a retrospective effect.
- Supreme Court of India
Children from void or voidable marriage can inherit property from self earned and ancestral property of parents
- MADRAS HIGH COURT
A person forwarding social media messages is responsible for its contents.
- Supreme Court of India
Marriages can be dissolved by apex court on ground of irretrievable breakdown under Article 142 of Constitution of India.
- Supreme Court of India
Constitution Court can impose fixed term sentence in case of Life sentence, as contemplated by “secondly” in Section 53 of the IPC, shall be of a fixed period of more than fourteen years viz., of twenty years, thirty years and so on.
- Supreme Court of India
A five-judge Constitution Bench modified the 2018 Euthanasia Guidelines to ease the process of granting passive euthanasia to terminally ill patients. Passive euthanasia involves withholding treatment or artificial life-support for a terminally ill patient until the remainder of their life.
- ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, UP
Held - Allahabad High Court Allowed 15% Fees Reduction in all Private And Public School During The Period Of Covid-19 For Session 2019-2020
- Supreme Court of India
Criminal Complaint under section 2(d) Cr.PC can be amended before taking cognizance by the court.
- Supreme Court of India
Abled body Husband is bound to maintain his wife not having sufficient means to maintain herself.
- DELHI HIGH COURT
Quashing of FIR under section 482 Cr.PC / Articles 226 of Constitution of India u/s 376, 377, 498 A of Indian Penal Code possible in matrimonial disputes
- Supreme Court of India
Para 29-The principles relating to the determination of the claim of juvenility under the Juvenile Justice Act 2015.
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
High Courts has a power to quash FIR of non-compoundable offences if it has no impact or depraving effect on the society at large, on the basis of a compromise between the accused and the victim or complainant.
- Supreme Court of India
We caution the High Courts again against passing such orders of not to arrest or “no coercive steps to be taken” till the investigation is completed and the final report is filed, while not entertaining quashing petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Held - 15% fees reduction is allowed to all private and Public School during the period of Covid-19 for session 2019-2020
- Supreme Court of India
There was a failure of the High Court to discharge its adjudicatory function at two levels – first in declining to evaluate prima facie at the interim stage in a petition for quashing the FIR as to whether an arguable case has been made out, and secondly, in declining interim bail, as a consequence of its failure to render a prima facie opinion on the first. The High Court did have the power to protect the citizen by an interim order in a petition invoking Article 226. Where the High Court has failed to do so, this Court would be abdicating its role and functions as a constitutional court if it refuses to interfere, despite the parameters for such interference being met. The doors of this Court cannot be closed to a citizen who is able to establish prima facie that the instrumentality of the State is being weaponized for using the force of criminal law. Our courts must ensure that they continue to remain the first line of defense against the deprivation of the liberty of citizens. Deprivation of liberty even for a single day is one day too many. We must always be mindful of the deeper systemic implications of our decisions.
- Supreme Court of India
General Guidelines and Directions - I. Issue of Overlapping Jurisdictions , II. Payment of interim maintenance, III. Criteria for determining quantum of maintenance, IV. Date from which Maintenance to be awarded, V. Enforcement of orders of maintenance, VI. Final Directions
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Held that no time limit could be fixed while granting anticipatory bail
- Supreme Court of India
Internet Shutdown & Restrictions under Section 144, Cr.P.C. in Kashmir Case
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Held - No Absolute Right Of Appointment For Minority Educational Institutions
- MADRAS HIGH COURT
There are no laws or regulations forbearing unmarried persons of opposite sex to occupy hotel rooms, as guests. While live-in-relationship of two adults is not deemed to be an offence, terming the occupation of hotel room by an unmarried couple, will not attract a criminal offence.
- Supreme Court of India
WHETHER NON-GAZETTED MEMBERS OF THE DELHI POLICE FORCE CAN FORM UNION UNDER ARTICLE 19(1)(C) OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
- Supreme Court of India
Section 27-Indian Evidence Act- Recovery Obtained by coerced confessional statement is illegal - If confessional statement is made under section 27, Indian Evidence Act is under undue pressure and compulsion from the investigating officer, the evidentiary value of such a statement leading to the recovery is nullified. - PARA 21 OF JUDGMENT
- Supreme Court of India
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are violative of Articles 14, 15(1), and 21 of the Constitution of India.
- DELHI HIGH COURT
Mere Physical Contact does not amount to Sexual Harassment-
Delhi High Court held -"The Complaint Committee concluded that respondent no.3 might have held the petitioner’s arm and thrown the material in her hand in a fit of anger; although, the said incident may be a case of harassment and is deplorable, the same would not qualify as a sexual harassment. Plainly, all physical contact cannot be termed as sexual harassment and only a physical contact or advances which are in the nature of an “unwelcome sexually determined behavior” would amount to sexual harassment.”
- Supreme Court of India
Hon'ble Supreme Court held "Talaq is manifestly arbitrary in the sense that the marital tie can be broken capriciously and whimsically by a Muslim man without any attempt at reconciliation so as to save it. This form of Talaq must, therefore, be held to be violative of the fundamental right contained under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In our opinion, therefore, the 1937 Act, insofar as it seeks to recognize and enforce Triple Talaq, is within the meaning of the expression “laws in force” in Article 13(1) and must be struck down as being void to the extent that it recognizes and enforces Triple Talaq".
- Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court has held that an intra-court appeal cannot be filed before a division bench of the high court if a single judge has passed the order in a criminal case
- Supreme Court of India
Bail application shall not remain pending in subordinate court for more than one week and in high court for not more than 2-3 weeks
- Supreme Court of India
This Court has held that a joint disclosure or simultaneous disclosures, per se, are not inadmissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Joint or simultaneous disclosure is a myth, because two or more accused persons would not have uttered informatory words in chorus.
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SEEKING VOTES ON GROUND OF RELIGION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL -
Hon'ble Supreme Court ban on seeking votes over religion, race or caste. Held- “religion, race, caste, community or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process”. Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act defines as “corrupt practice” appeals made by a candidate or his agents to vote or refrain from voting for any person on the ground of “his” religion, race, caste, community or language. The Constitution forbids state from mixing religion with politics,” ruled a seven-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice T.S. Chief Justice Thakur, judges S.A. Bobde, Adarsh Kumar Goel and L. Nageswara Rao and Madan B. Lokur formed the majority opinion. Three judges—Adarsh Kumar Goel, U.U. Lalit and D.Y. Chandrachud—argued against it maintaining this was the prerogative of Parliament
- Supreme Court of India
NATIONAL ANTHEM CASE- it is the duty of every person to show respect when the National Anthem is played or recited or sung. Apex court passed following directions -
(a) There shall be no commercial exploitation to give financial advantage or any kind of benefit.
(b) There shall not be dramatization of the National Anthem and it should not be included as a part of any variety show.
(c) Not be printed on any object and also never be displayed in such a manner at such places which may be disgraceful to its status and tantamount to disrespect.
(d) All the cinema halls in India shall play the National Anthem before the feature film starts and all present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the National Anthem.
(e) Prior to the National Anthem is played or sung in the cinema hall on the screen, the entry and exit doors shall remain closed so that no one can create any kind of disturbance which will amount to disrespect to the National Anthem. After the National Anthem is played or sung, the doors can be opened.
(f) When the National Anthem shall be played in the Cinema Halls, it shall be with the National Flag on the screen.
(g) The abridge version of the National Anthem made by any one for whatever reason shall not be played or displayed.
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BONE OSSIFICATION TEST MEDICAL IS NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF AGE- Medical evidence as to the age of a person though a very useful guiding factor is not conclusive and has to be considered along with other circumstances. Bench said "We hold that ossification test cannot be regarded as conclusive when it comes to ascertaining the age of a person"
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CONVICTION DESPITE WITNESS TURNED HOSTILE-
it is held by Apex court "In my fieldwork experiences, witnesses become “hostile” not only when they are directly implicated in a case filed by the police, but also when they are on the side of the plaintiff's party. During the often rather long period that elapses between the police investigation and the trial itself, often observed, the party who has lodged the complaint (and who becomes the main witness) can irreparably compromise the case with the other party by means of compensation, threat or blackmail."
The State has a definite role to play in protecting the witnesses, to start with at least in sensitive cases involving those in power, who has political patronage and could wield muscle and money power, to avert trial getting tainted and derailed and truth becoming a casualty. As a protector of its citizens it has to ensure that during a trial in Court the witness could safely depose truth without any fear of being haunted by those against whom he had deposed. Every State has a constitutional obligation and duty to protect the life and liberty of its citizens.
- Supreme Court of India
Sex Workers cannot lodge a sexual assualt (Rape) complaint against their customers if they refuse to pay money. Further held though the evidence given by a woman alleging rape must get importance from the trial court, but it could not be taken as 'GOSPEL TRUTH'
- Supreme Court of India
IMPORTANT SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT-
GOLDEN PRINCIPLES IN CASE OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCES-
1.The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established.
2. The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty.
3. The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
4. They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved and;
5. There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not o leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
- Supreme Court of India
Copy of first information report shall be made available online except heinous offences
- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ISSUED GUIDELINES TO SAVE LIFE OF VICTIMS OF ROAD ACCIDENTS BY SAMARITANS i.e ByStanders who are helping them. The petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India in public interest for the development of supportive legal framework to protect Samaritans i.e. bystanders and passers-by who render the help to the victims of road accidents. These individuals can play a significant role in order to save lives of the victims by either immediately rushing them to the hospital or providing immediate life saving first aid
- Supreme Court of India
Examiners Identity cannot be revealed under Right to Information Act- Held by Supreme Court of India