Colorable Investigation

There is a subtle difference between a defective investigation and one brought forth by a calculated and deliberate action or inaction. While dealing with a defective investigation, Court is expected to sift evidence available and find out truth. Every case involves a journey towards truth. We are distressed to note, investigation has not been conducted […]

Read more "Colorable Investigation"

Claim of Juvenility

A claim of juvenility may be raised at any stage of a criminal proceeding, even after a final disposal. An application claiming juvenility could be made either before Court or JJ Board. It is neither feasible nor desirable to lay down an abstract formula to determine age of a person. It has to be on […]

Read more "Claim of Juvenility"

Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat

The act of ‘touching’ sexual part of body or any other act involving ‘physical contact’, if done with ‘sexual intent’, would amount to ‘sexual assault’ within meaning of Section 7 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Restricting interpretation of words ‘touch’ or ‘physical contact’ to ‘skin to skin contact’ would not […]

Read more "Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat"

Repugnancy II

An interpreter, to deviate from defined meaning, should record reasons to show word/expression in a particular provision carries a different meaning; contrary context is not to be assumed or accepted easily, in absence of indication and reason to differ from defined meaning. Repugnancy is not indicated and does not arise in context of Clause 22(ix)(a) […]

Read more "Repugnancy II"

Preventive Detention Statute II / The Revival of Ray LXXIV

Sarabjeet Singh Mokha is said to have procured fake Remdesivir injections which were administered to patients during COVID-19 pandemic to make illegal profits. Article 22 of the Constitution provides specific protections to undertrials and detainees in India. The communication of grounds is in aid of facilitating right of detenu to submit a representation against ‘order […]

Read more "Preventive Detention Statute II / The Revival of Ray LXXIV"

Investigation II

Gauri Lankesh was shot dead by unknown assailants, near her house at Rajarajeshwari Nagar [Bengaluru], on 05.09.2017. _____  This is limited to consideration of whether prior approval by Commissioner of Police [Bengaluru City], in connection with offence registered as Crime No. 221/2017, is valid or otherwise. We hold, same does not suffer from any infirmity. […]

Read more "Investigation II"

Investigation I

H N Rishbud v. State of Delhi, (1955) 1 SCR 1150; Ramsinh Bavaji Jadeja v. State of Gujarat, (1994) 2 SCC 685; Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja, (2003) 6 SCC 195. What emerges is, an investigation commences upon receipt of information by Police which discloses commission of a cognizable offence. However, mere receipt […]

Read more "Investigation I"

Nature’s Gifts

Suresh Lohiya v. State of Maharashtra, (1996) 10 SCC 397 struck a ‘discordant note’, drawing a distinction between ‘nature’s gifts’ such as charcoal, mahua flowers or minerals and articles produced with aid of human labour which, according to it, was not included in ‘forest produce’ under The Kerala Forest Act, 1961. Suresh Lohiya did not […]

Read more "Nature’s Gifts"

Judgment

‘Judgment’ means a judicial opinion which tells the story of the case; what the case is about; how the Court is resolving the case and why. ‘Judgment’ should be coherent, systematic and logically organized. It should enable the reader to trace the fact to a logical conclusion on the basis of legal principles. Many times […]

Read more "Judgment"

Backdrop of Dominant Purpose

Philips India Limited v. Labour Court, Madras, (1985) 3 SCC 103; Balasinor Nagrik Cooperative Bank Limited v. Babubhai Shankerlal Pandya, (1987) 1 SCC 606; Mohan Kumar Singhania v. Union of India, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 594; Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain, (1997) 1 SCC 373; Jagdish Singh v. Lt. Governor, Delhi, (1997) 4 SCC […]

Read more "Backdrop of Dominant Purpose"

Binding Precedent

Umabai v. Nilkanth Dhondiba Chavan, (2005) 6 SCC 243 and Tulsi v. Chandrika Prasad, (2006) 8 SCC 322 were not brought to notice of this Court in Vanchalabai Raghunath Ithape v. Shankarrao Baburao Bhilare, (2013) 7 SCC 173. In absence of consideration, we find Vanchalabai Raghunath Ithape will not lay down a binding precedent. – […]

Read more "Binding Precedent"

Monstrosity of Winnability II

The nation continues to wait, and is losing patience. A political party can always give a reason, a candidate with criminal antecedents is found to be more suitable than a person who does not have criminal antecedents. If the political party is of the prima facie opinion, a candidate has been falsely implicated, it can […]

Read more "Monstrosity of Winnability II"

Cancellation of Bail

Section 389(1), CrPC allows Court to release a convicted person on bail. The factors that govern grant of suspension of sentence under Section 389(1) have been discussed by this Court in Atul Tripathi v. State of U.P., (2014) 9 SCC 177. Ramji Prasad v. Rattan Kumar Jaiswal, (2002) 9 SCC 366 observed, in cases involving […]

Read more "Cancellation of Bail"

Be Kind Rewind, Strict Liability

“The Strict Liability Rule under Common Law is a relic of the past and should not be given effect in the Indian context.” – Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Taj Mahal Hotel v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2020) 2 SCC 224. _____ There is certainly a phantom thread concerning the Rule of Strict Liability and […]

Read more "Be Kind Rewind, Strict Liability"

May & Shall II

It is to be considered whether the word ‘shall’ used in Section 12 of The Disaster Management Act, 2005 is required to be interpreted and considered as ‘shall’ or ‘may’ and whether it is ‘mandatory’ or ‘directory/discretionary’. The word ‘shall’ is used twice. Cases are not wanting where the words ‘may’, ‘shall’ and ‘must’ are […]

Read more "May & Shall II"