(CrPC) – Section 311 – The significant expression that occurs is “at any stage of any inquiry or trial or other proceeding under this Code”. It is, however, to be borne in mind that the discretionary power conferred under Section 311 CrPC has to be exercised judiciously, as it is always said “wider the power, greater is the necessity of caution while exercise of judicious discretion.”

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH V.N. PATIL — Appellant Vs. K. NIRANJAN KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

If evidence on record clearly establishes that the deceased was murdered by the accused by using firearm, the factum of motive loses its importance, more so, in this case the motive has been established by leading cogent evidence to show that only because the deceased had developed relationship with accused’s wife, has decided to eliminate the deceased

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAHUL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 262…

Dying declaration – Deceased has suffered 90 per cent injuries and was in a fit condition to make a declaration – Deceased was tortured by the accused and his family members – Merely because family members were in the hospital, the same is no ground to disbelieve the dying declaration – Conviction upheld.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATPAL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 261…

Murder – Post-Mortem Report – No marks on the body which would suggest violence or struggle – In any case, the medical expert himself has not ruled out the possibility of suicidal death – Post-Mortem Report shows, that the cause of death was ‘asphyxia due to hanging’ – Appellant acquitted.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHIVAJI CHINTAPPA PATIL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman and B. R. Gavai, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

I B C, 2016 – S 14 – For the period of moratorium, since no Section 138/141 (NIA) proceeding can continue or be initiated against the corporate debtor because of a statutory bar, such proceedings can be initiated or continued against the persons mentioned in Section 141(1) and (2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH P. MOHANRAJ AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S. SHAH BROTHERS ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha and…