Category: Cr P C

First Information Report—Only information in regard to commission of an offence may not for all intent and purport satisfy the requirement of the First Information Report. First Information Report—A First Information Report cannot be lodged in a murder case after the inquest has been held. Motive—Proof of motive by itself may not be a ground to hold the accused guilty.

  2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3189 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce Harjit Singh Bedi Criminal Appeal Nos. 844-846…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 386(a) – Reversal of order of acquittal – Section 386(a) places no restrictions on power of appellate Court to convert order of acquittal into conviction – However, there should be good and compelling reasons for appellate Court to convert order of acquittal into conviction.

  (2011) 10 JT 77 : (2011) 9 SCALE 59 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA C. RONALD AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE, U.T. OF ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS — Respondent…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 406 – Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 – Section 6 – Transfer of CBI case – Once a State Government issues notification transferring investigation to CBI, for all intents and purposes, CBI is entitled to exercise the same powers as State Police, in relation to investigation transferred to it

  AIR 2011 SC 1549 : (2011) CriLJ 997 : (2010) 12 JT 641 : (2011) 1 RCR(Criminal) 120 : (2010) 12 SCALE 199 : (2011) 1 SCC 307 :…

You missed

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.