Supreme court
Mere Claim Of Innocence Or Undertaking To Participate In Trial Not Sufficient Reasons To Grant Bail In Serious Offences : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, while hearing an appeal against the order passed by the Jharkhand High Court allowing a bail application for an accused charged with an attempt to murder, observed that simply asserting innocence or agreeing to participate in the trial is not a valid reason for granting bail to an accused in serious offences. “At any rate, mere claim of innocence or undertaking to...
Supreme Court Half Yearly Digest 2023 [Indian Penal Code 1860]
Penal Code, 1860 - Constitutional Courts can impose fixed term sentence even in cases where death penalty was not proposed - "Even in a case where capital punishment is not imposed or is not proposed, the Constitutional Courts can always exercise the power of imposing a modified or fixed-term sentence by directing that a life sentence, as contemplated by “secondly” in Section 53 of the...
Supreme Court Monthly Round-Up November 2023
Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 932 To 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1025Nominal Index Indrakunwar v. State of Chattisgarh 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 932Manish Sisodia v. Central Bureau of Investigation 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 934Bhisham Lal Verma V. State of Uttar Pradesh 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 935Pradeep Mehra V. Harijivan J. Jethwa 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 936Manak Chand v. State of Haryana 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 937IFFCO Tokio...
West Bengal Universities' Row | Supreme Court Seeks Attorney General's Intervention For Resolution Of Deadlock Between Governor & Govt
In the latest development in the ongoing clash between West Bengal Governor CV Anand Bose and the state government over interim vice-chancellor appointments at state-run universities, the Supreme Court last week(December 1) asked Attorney General for India R Venkataramani to organise a joint meeting with all stakeholders to break the logjam. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and...
Court Not Obligated To Frame Charges If Offences Are Not Made Out From Admitted Evidence Of Prosecution: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently (on December 01) reiterated that if the necessary ingredients of an offence are not made out from the admitted evidence of the prosecution, then the Court is not obligated to frame a charge for such an offence against the accused."...there is also a long line of precedents that from the admitted evidence of the prosecution as reflected in the documents filed by...
S. 34 IPC | Common Intention Doesn't Mean Prior Agreement, It Can Be Formed Even A Minute Before The Incident: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently clarified that for Section 34(common intention) of the Indian Penal Code to be applicable, there must be a common intention among all co-accused individuals, indicating a shared purpose and design. Notably, common intention doesn't necessitate explicit discussions or agreements among the co-accused; it is a psychological aspect that can arise just before or during...
Abetment Of Suicide | Instigation Must Be In Close Proximity To Suicide : Supreme Court Quashes Case Under S.306 IPC
The Supreme Court, while quashing a case for abetment of suicide against an accused, discussed the essentials to convict a person under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code(IPC). It is pertinent to note that “Abetment” is defined under section 107 IPC. The Court explained that, for the first part of Section 107 to apply, the accused must have intentionally encouraged and pushed the...
Kerala Lok Ayukta Only Has Recommendatory Jurisdiction, Cannot Issue Positive Directions: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently held that the Lok Ayukta, under the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act 1999, cannot issue positive directions and that it only has the jurisdiction to submit a report to the concerned authority with its recommendations.A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Rajesh Bindal made reference to the judgments of the Kerala High Court in Sudha Devi K. v. District Collector 2017...
Order VII Rule 11 CPC - No Evidence Or Merits Of Controversy Can Be Examined While Deciding Rejection Of Plaint : Supreme Court
Recently, the Supreme Court (on November 30) held that no amount of evidence or merits of the controversy could be examined at the stage of deciding rejection of a plaint application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.). It may be noted that this order provides the grounds on which the Court shall reject a plaint.The Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh...
Second Suit Seeking Damages For Illegal Occupation Maintainable After Filing Suit For Possession : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that a suit for possession and suit for claiming damages for use and occupation of the property are two different causes of action. Hence, second suit filed claiming damages for use and occupation of the premises was maintainable after a suit for possession.A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal was considering an appeal challenging the refusal of...
Order 41 Rule 17 CPC - Appeal Can't Be Dismissed On Merits If Appellant Fails To Appear; To Be Dismissed For Non-Prosecution : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court stated that if the appellant does not appear when the appeal is called for a hearing, then the same can be dismissed for non-prosecution and not on merits. These findings were in the context of an explanation provided in Order XLI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. This order entitles the Court to dismiss an appeal if, on the day fixed for hearing, the appellant...
Specific Performance Of Re-Conveyance Deed Can't Be Sought When Plaintiff Denies Defendant's Title In Property : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, while denying the plea of specific performance for execution of the re-conveyance deed, noted that such a claim implies that the opposite party (against whom the claim is being made) is the owner. Whereas, on the other hand, it was pleaded that the opposite party did not have any right or title over such property. In view of these facts and circumstances, the Court held...