Supreme Court of India Judgements

46670 Judgements hosted as on 9/12/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

I P C

False promise of marriage – Horoscope Examination of Rape Victim – Prosecutrix is mangali, therefore, marriage could not be solemnized and the same has been refused – Order passed by the Allahabad High Court which directed the Head of Department (Astrology Department), Lucknow may decide the matter whether the girl is mangali or not is stayed.

Bysclaw

Jun 11, 2023

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

VACATION BENCH

GOBIND RAI @ MONU — Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent

( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. )

Suo Motu Writ Petition(Criminal) Diary No. 23462 of 2023 with Crl. Misc. Bail Appln. No. 13485 of 2022

Decided on : 03-06-2023

False promise of marriage – Horoscope Examination of Rape Victim – Prosecutrix is mangali, therefore, marriage could not be solemnized and the same has been refused – Order passed by the Allahabad High Court which directed the Head of Department (Astrology Department), Lucknow may decide the matter whether the girl is mangali or not is stayed.

Counsel for Appearing Parties

Mr. Tushar Mehta, SGI, for the Appellant; Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate, for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. This Court takes a Suo Motu cognizance of this case which has been placed before us. The order passed by the learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court(Lucknow Bench) on 23rd May, 2023 while considering a bail application is the subject matter of this case. At this stage, we say nothing on the merits of the case, except that in the interest of Justice, the operation and effect of this order so far as it gives directions to the Head of the Department (Astrology Department), Lucknow University must be Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India is present before this Court representing the Union of India, who would also argue for the stay of the order presently before us.

2. Issue notice to all the parties concerned i.e. bail applicant, the complainant as well as the State of Uttar Pradesh. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned AOR representing the complainant/victim is already before us, who accepts notice on behalf of the complainant.

3. In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of the operation and effect of the order dated 23rd May, 2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court(Lucknow Bench).

4. We make it clear that the matter will be taken up on merits of the bail application by the High Court on 26th June, 2023 which is the date already fixed in the matter.

5. List the matter in the week commencing from 10th July, 2023. We expect to have before us the contentions/objection of all the parties before the next date of hearing.

By sclaw

Related Post

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302, 324 and 326 — Murder — Intent for Murder — The Court reaffirmed that intent for murder can be inferred from the circumstances of the incident, including the nature of injuries and the choice of weapon, even if there was no prior premeditation – Exception 2 to Section 300 — Private Defense — The Court clarified that the right of private defense under Exception 2 to Section 300 IPC does not apply if the accused was the aggressor or if the force used was excessive and disproportionate.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw
Cr P C I P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of Criminal Proceedings under Section 482 in Cases with Predominantly Civil Character — The court reiterated the principle that criminal cases with overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions, matrimonial relationships, or family disputes, should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves — This principle is applied in the present case, where the dispute involved a loan transaction between the accused persons and the bank, and the parties had settled the matter through the One Time Settlement (OTS).

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 420 — Passports Act, 1967 — Section 12(2) — The appellant was convicted for abetting the issuance of a second passport to a person already possessing a passport — The Supreme Court set aside the conviction and acquitted appellant due to insufficient evidence proving her guilt beyond reasonable doubt — Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires each circumstance to be proven beyond reasonable doubt and the circumstances taken together should lead to an irresistible inference of guilt — Under Section 12(2), the prosecution bears the burden of proving that the accused knowingly furnished false information or suppressed material information with the intent to secure a passport or travel document — The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court, and acquitted appellant of the offences alleged against her.

Oct 2, 2024 sclaw

Leave a Reply

You missed

Constitution Service

Classification of Military casualties and the eligibility for Liberalised Family Pension — Battle Casualty —Illness Caused by Extreme Climatic Conditions as Battle Casualty — The Court establishes that a soldier’s death due to illness resulting from extreme climatic conditions while on duty near a sensitive border area (such as the Line of Control) can be categorized as a ‘Battle Casualty’ — This expands the interpretation of what constitutes a battle casualty under military regulations. – Liberalised Family Pension (LFP) — Application of Category E (f) — The judgment clarifies that deaths occurring in war-like situations, including those near international borders or lines of control due to environmental stresses, fall under clause (f) of category E of the relevant military order — This broadens the scope of eligibility for LFP under such circumstances.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Temple Bye Laws — Oachira Parabrahma Temple — Ancient structure without a building or deity, governed by Bye-laws with three-tier elected committees — Appellants, elected Secretary and President, challenged two High Court orders (2020 and 2023) that removed their committee and appointed an unelected one under an Administrative Head, citing violations of the temple’s Bye-laws and customs —Legality of appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one contrary to the temple’s Bye-laws — Petitioner argues that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction and violated the temple’s governance structure by appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one without proper legal basis — The High Court’s actions were necessary for the efficient administration of the temple until a scheme could be framed and new elections held — The Supreme Court modified the High Court orders, appointing a new retired Judge as Administrative Head to conduct fair elections within four months, while directing all parties to cooperate — The Court emphasized the need to preserve temple properties and governance as per established customs and laws — The Supreme Court struck down the High Court’s order appointing an unelected committee, appointed a new Administrative Head to conduct elections, and directed all parties to cooperate, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the temple’s established governance structure and Bye-laws.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 384, 364, 302 and 201 — Murder — Circumstantial Evidence — The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges as the prosecution failed to prove the crucial link of the accused’s disclosure leading to the discovery of skeletal remains under Section 27 and the DNA evidence was also found to be inconclusive due to lack of proper collection of samples. – Proof of Disclosure Statements under Section 27 — Voluntariness and Uninfluenced Nature — The Court reiterates that the information provided by an accused under Section 27 must be voluntary and uninfluenced by threat, duress, or coercion.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 25, 54 and 59 — Buttondar knife — Specific Intent Required — The court clarifies that mere possession of a knife covered by a notification like the DAD Notification is not sufficient to constitute an offense under the Arms Act — There must be specific intent to use it for the prohibited purposes such as “manufacture, sale, or possession for sale or test.” – The prosecution must clearly allege and prove the intent of the accused to use the weapon for the specified prohibited purposes — Absence of such allegation in the charge-sheet renders the proceedings defective.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw