Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 363, 366-A, 376(A), 376(2)(i), 376(2)(j), 376(2)(k), 376(2)(m), 302 and 201 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 – Section 6 – Death sentence – Kidnapping, Rape and Murder of 3 months old girl child – Hurried Trial – Prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence in which the prosecution has to prove each link in the chain of circumstantial evidence and the important chains in the link are DNA report, FSL report and Viscera report – Trial has been conducted on day-to-day basis wherein the accused, who was in jail and defended by a counsel from legal aid, was compelled by the Trial Court to produce defence witness of his own in one day – – There was no opportunity, in the real sense, to the appellant to cross-examine the experts – Death sentence sentence set aside – matter is remitted back to the trial court for de novo trial
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH NAVEEN @ AJAY — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Prashant Kumar…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder of newborn child – Acquittal – None of the witnesses has seen the convict-appellant throwing the deceased child into the dabri; as hitherto observed, no conclusive proof, of any nature, of relationship had been put forth by the prosecution; no evidence has been led to cast doubt upon the version of the convict – Statement of the doctor is silent on the death of the deceased having occurred prior to or after birth, although in examination in chief, the doctor has deposed that the death of the deceased child was homicidal in nature; however, in the cross-examination, it is admitted that such fact does not form part of the record, thereby calling into question the conclusion itself as it is a vital piece of information that has been omitted – Conviction and sentence set-aside – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH INDRAKUNWAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.1730…
Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 – Sections 7(1) and 7(2) – Non-payment of arrears of rent – Extension of time – While the Limitation Act may be generally applicable to the proceedings under the Tenancy Act, the restricted proviso under Section 7 of the said Act, providing a time period beyond which no extension can be granted, has to be applicable.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEBASISH PAUL AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. AMAL BORAL — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder of female colleague – Dying declarations – It is an established principle that a dying declaration, if it is free of tutoring, prompting, etc. can form the sole basis of conviction – For instance, nothing on record indicates- the ownership of a vehicle by the convict-appellant; any disagreement or animosity between the convict-appellant and the deceased, that is of such an extreme nature as to set her on fire; any connection between the convict-appellant and the inflammable substance used to kill the victim such as the record of purchase or statement of any person to show such substance to be in possession of the convict-appellant, etc – Conviction and sentence set aside – Acquittal.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ABHISHEK SHARMA — Appellant Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. )…
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 7 – Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – Section 13(2) – In absence of averments or pleading, after initiation of insolvency proceeding, any promise made to pay the debt cannot be treated to have cured the fault of limitation in a preexisting action – In the event a financial creditor wants to pursue a recovery certificate as a deemed decree, he would get twelve years’ time.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TOTTEMPUDI SALALITH — Appellant Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Civil…
Medical Negligence – The standard to be applied for judging, whether the person charged has been negligent or not, would be that of an ordinary competent person exercising ordinary skill in that profession. It is not possible for every professional to possess the highest level of expertise or skills in that branch which he practices. A highly skilled professional may be possessed of better qualities, but that cannot be made the basis or the yardstick for judging the performance of the professional proceeded against on indictment of negligence.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MRS. KALYANI RAJAN — Appellant Vs. INDRAPRASTHA APOLLO HOSPITAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…
SAME SEX MARRIAGE – Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S. Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH SUPRIYO @ SUPRIYA CHAKRABORTY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., Sanjay Kishan…
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) – Sections 138 and 139 – Dishonour of cheque – Appeal against acquittal – Rebuttal of rebuttal – Once the presumption under Section 139 was given effect to, the Courts ought to have proceeded on the premise that the cheque was, indeed, issued in discharge of a debt/liability. The entire focus would then necessarily have to shift on the case set up by the accused, since the activation of the presumption has the effect of shifting the evidential burden on the accused. The nature of inquiry would then be to see whether the accused has discharged his onus of rebutting the presumption. If he fails to do so, the Court can straightaway proceed to convict him – Order of acquittal set aside – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH JAIN — Appellant Vs. AJAY SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Aravind Kumar and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. of 2023…
Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 18 – Condonation of delay of around 479 days in presentation of an appeal from the decision of the Reference Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – High Court’s decision to condone the delay does not suffer from any error warranting interference, such an exercise of discretion does, at times, call for a liberal and justice-oriented approach by the Courts, where certain leeway could be provided to the State – A court of appeal should not ordinarily interfere with the discretion exercised by the courts below – An appellate power interferes not when the order appealed is not right but only when it is clearly wrong.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHEO RAJ SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi…
A medical termination of the pregnancy cannot be permitted because it has crossed the statutory limit of twenty-four weeks – Neither of the two reports submitted by the Medical Boards indicates that a termination is immediately necessary to save the life of the petitioner, in terms of Section 5 – If a medical termination were to be conducted at this stage, the doctors would be faced with a viable foetus – Delivery will be conducted by AIIMS at the appropriate time – Union Government has undertaken to pay all the medical costs for the delivery and incidental to it.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH X — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., J B Pardiwala and Manoj…