Category: Cr P C

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.185–False Statement- In order to prosecute an accused for an offence punishable under Section 182 IPC, it is mandatory to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 195 of the Code else such action is rendered void ab initio-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.195.

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 144 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 513 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre Criminal…

It is necessary for the Appellate Court which is confronted with the absence of the convict as well as his Counsel, to immediately proceed against the persons who stood surety at the time when the convict was granted bail, as this may lead to his discovery and production in Court – So far as the present Appeal is concerned, since a request for remand had been made which Court stoutly reject, and since the convict was not represented through Counsel before the High Court, Court think it proper to permit the Appellant an opportunity to argue the Appeal on its merits.

  (2013) 10 AD 565 : (2013) 4 RCR(Criminal) 880 : (2013) 12 SCALE 492 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SURYA BAKSH SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 311 – Summoning of witness – Closure of prosecution evidence – Order passed merely on ground that public prosecutor has not prayed for adjournment or for examination of other witnesses – No notice issued to Police Station Officer-in-charge – Order cannot be said to be proper – Witnesses can be summoned under Section 311 in spite of said order.

  AIR 2002 SC 270 : (2002) CriLJ 568 : (2002) 1 Crimes 197 : (2001) 10 JT 111 : (2001) 8 SCALE 320 : (2002) 1 SCC 655 :…

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.