February 2, 2026 1:46 am

Sanction for prosecution–Defective sanction–Acquittal not justified.

Bysclaw

Apr 22, 2017

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.

By sclaw

Related Post

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) — Sections 2(y), 2(ze) — Appointment under reserved quota — Management Trainee recruitment by Coal India Limited (CIL) — Denial of appointment based on initial finding of unfitness and recruitment process expiry — Appellant suffering from disability above the benchmark (57%) based on subsequent AIIMS medical report — Expiry of recruitment panel cannot nullify appellant’s right to employment when initial denial was wrongful and due to the employer’s failure to account for “multiple disability” in the notification — Held, appellant is eligible for appointment; appropriate relief moulded using extraordinary powers. (Paras 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 23, 29, 30, 31, 37)

Jan 18, 2026 sclaw

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) — Section 18A — PC Act read with Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 102 — Seizure vs. Attachment/Confiscation of Property — Whether power of police officer to freeze accounts under Section 102 CrPC is co-existent or mutually exclusive with the machinery for attachment under Section 18A PC Act — Held, the powers are separate, distinct, and co-existent, not mutually exclusive. (Paras 2, 8, 11)

Dec 13, 2025 sclaw

Anticipatory Bail Corruption

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Bail — Anticipatory Bail — Supreme Court granted leave to appeal against High Court’s rejection of bail in anticipation of arrest — Custodial interrogation not required — Appellant may be admitted to bail in anticipation of arrest upon arrest, subject to terms and conditions fixed by the trial court — Appellant directed not to dissuade witnesses from disclosing facts to authorities.

Oct 12, 2025 sclaw

Categories

Archives

You missed

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 108, 80, 103, 85 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3, 4 — Offences — Abetment to suicide, Dowry death, Murder — Allegations of extra-marital relationship, demand of money/dowry — Deceased died of poisoning/injection — Autopsy findings — Prosecution case not strong at bail stage.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 33(1) — Requirement for employer to seek permission before altering service conditions or stopping work of workmen during pendency of dispute — Failure to do so constitutes a breach of the Act.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Sections 10(1), 12 — Reference of industrial dispute — Apprehended dispute — Appropriate Government’s power to refer — The appropriate Government has the power to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication if it is of the opinion that such dispute exists or is apprehended. The initiation of conciliation proceedings under Section 12 does not statutorily require a prior demand notice to the employer as a pre-condition to approaching the Conciliation Officer. The management’s argument that a prior demand notice is essential, based on certain previous judgments, fails as it ignores the provision for referring an apprehended dispute, which can be invoked to prevent industrial unrest

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 175(4) — Complaints against public servants alleged to have committed offenses in discharge of official duties — Interpretation — This provision is not a standalone provision, nor is it a proviso to Section 175(3) — It must be read in harmony with Section 175(3), with Section 175(4) forming an extension of Section 175(3) — The power to order investigation under Section 175(3) is conferred upon a judicial magistrate, while Section 175(4) also confers such power but prescribes a special procedure for complaints against public servants — The expression “complaint” in Section 175(4) does not encompass oral complaints and must be understood in the context of a written complaint supported by an affidavit, as required by Section 175(3) — This interpretation ensures that the procedural safeguard of an affidavit, mandated by Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P., is not undermined even when dealing with public servants — The intention is to provide a two-tier protection: first, at the threshold stage under Section 175(4) with additional safeguards, and second, at the post-investigation stage under Section 218(1) regarding previous sanction. (Paras 26, 31, 37.1, 37.2, 37.4, 37.5, 37.6, 37.8, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44)

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw