'Yawning Gap In Evidence' : Supreme Court Finds Conviction Wrong In 2004 Murder Case; Sets Aside Concurrent Findings Of HC & Trial Court

The Supreme Court has observed that when the prosecution case is solely based on the circumstantial evidence, then the courts must be vigilant while examining the facts proving the circumstantial evidence i.e., it must be consistent with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and should be free from doubts, improbabilities and inconsistencies. Reversing the concurrent findings of the...

Appellate Court Should Give Benefit Of Doubt To Accused If A View Different From Trial Court's View Is Possible : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that an appellate court should give the benefit of doubt to the accused persons if the evidence on record indicates the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and that a plausible view, different from the one expressed by the courts below can be taken.Reversing the concurrent findings of guilt entered by the trial court...

Insurance Policy Effective From Date Of Issuance, Not From Date Of Proposal Or Date Of Issuance Of Receipt: Supreme Court

In the context of insurance protection, the Supreme Court held that the policy issuance date would be the relevant date for all purposes.The issue before the Court was what would be the date from which the policy becomes effective; whether it would be the date on which the policy is issued or the date of the commencement mentioned in the policy, or it would be the date of the issuance of...

No Case Of Rape By False promise Of Marriage When Marriage Was Solemnised Ultimately: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court (on January 03), while quashing a criminal case against the accused-appellant for raping a 25-year-old woman on the pretext of marriage, held that there was a consensual relationship that culminated into marriage. Thus, the Court did not find any basis for the allegation that the physical relationship was due to the false promise of marriage as, ultimately, the marriage...

Tenant Can't Claim Adverse Possession Against Landlord; Tenancy Is Permissive Possession : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that tenants cannot claim claim adverse possession against their landlords, since their possession is permissive in nature.A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal was deciding an appeal filed by a plaintiff challenging a judgment of the Allahabad High Court which dismissed the suit for ownership/possession as time-barred.The plaintiff claimed...

S.138 NI Act : Supreme Court Slams Accused In Cheque Bounce Case For Not Honouring Undertaking To Pay; Imposes Rs 5 Lakhs Cost

The Supreme Court (on January 03) took a strong stand while affirming the suspension of the accused/ present appellant's sentence, who was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.The Court highlighted that the complainant has been litigating since 2007, i.e., for almost 16 years, but has not been able to receive its due amount. This was irrespective of an...

Preventive Detention | When Detenu Receives Grounds Of Detention In Language Known To Him, No Need For Oral Information Again : Supreme Court

While dismissing a challenge to detention on the ground that the detenu/appellant was not informed by authorities of his rights, the Supreme Court observed that if a detenu receives the grounds of detention in a language known to him and the same contain a clear statement over his right to make representation, there is no need for informing him verbally again. Speaking of Article...

Arbitral Awards Cannot Be Modified Under Sections 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court

While deciding on a plea whether there is a scope of interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Supreme Court has reiterated the settled position of law that any attempt to “modify an award” while adjudicating Sections 34 and 37 petitions is not permissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.The Division Bench...

Accused Doesn't Lose A Defence Merely Because That Plea Wasn't Taken In S.313 CrPC Statment: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in its recent judgment (on January 04), reiterated the well-established law that the statement recorded under Section 313 (Power to examine the accused) of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973, cannot form the sole basis of conviction. The Court underscored that such a statement of an accused is not evidence. The reasons are twofold. Firstly, it is not on...

IBC | Inappropriate For NCLAT To Direct NCLT To Admit Petition Under Section 7 Without Evaluating Rival Contentions On Merits: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has set aside an order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) whereby the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) was directed to admit a petition under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).The Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, has held...

Prosecution Can't Seek To Prove In Trial A Fact Which Witness Hasn't Told Police During Investigation : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court (on January 04), while allowing the criminal appeal of the accused-appellant, observed that during a trial, the prosecution could not seek to prove a fact that the witness has not stated in his/her statement under Section 161 (Examination of witnesses by police) of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973."Prosecution cannot seek to prove a fact during trial through a witness...

Section 27 Evidence Act Vulnerable To Abuse, Courts Must Be Vigilant : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in its verdict delivered on January 03, while making somepertinent observations regarding Section 27 of the Evidence Act, also cautioned that the police frequently use this provision and the courts must be vigilant about its application. “Section 27 of the Evidence Act is frequently used by the police, and the courts must be vigilant about its application to...