Tag: Chargesheet

Can In-Laws Be Summoned for Murder if Not Named in the Chargesheet? Supreme Court Answers
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Can In-Laws Be Summoned for Murder if Not Named in the Chargesheet? Supreme Court Answers

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies the principles for summoning additional accused under Section 319 CrPC, holding that courts must apply a "strong and cogent evidence" standard—stricter than a prima facie case but short of conviction-weight evidence. It emphasizes that evidentiary reliability, witness credibility, and dying declaration admissibility are trial-stage determinations, not preliminary considerations. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from an FIR lodged on March 25, 2021, by the appellant, Neeraj Kumar, alleging that his sister, Nishi, was shot by her husband, Rahul, at her matrimonial home. The information was conveyed to the appellant by his nine-year-old niece, Shristi, who witnessed the incident. During the investigation, the deceased's statements were recorded tw...
Read More
Dowry Death: Supreme Court Cancels Husband’s Bail in Shocking Poisoning Case
18Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Dowry Death: Supreme Court Cancels Husband’s Bail in Shocking Poisoning Case

The Supreme Court annulled the bail granted to a husband accused of dowry death, holding that the High Court erred by ignoring the statutory presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act and the gravity of offences under Sections 304B and 498A IPC. Bail orders ignoring material evidence and established legal principles are perverse and liable to be set aside. Facts Of The Case: The appellant's daughter was married to the first respondent on 22.02.2023. Within four months of the marriage, on 05.06.2023, she died under suspicious circumstances after allegedly being forced to consume a poisonous substance. Prior to her death, she had complained to her family about persistent harassment and a demand for a Fortuner car as additional dowry by her husband and his relatives. On the night of...
Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies: Pending Cases Don’t Justify Violating Active Court Orders
6Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies: Pending Cases Don’t Justify Violating Active Court Orders

The Supreme Court held that once an interim court order is in operation, it remains binding unless specifically vacated. Merely releasing a reserved matter does not invalidate or nullify an existing interim order. Violating such an order without obtaining prior leave from the court constitutes a prima facie case for contempt proceedings. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, a professor at KGMU, was appointed as the Nodal Officer for implementing a software system in 2010. In 2017, audit objections arose regarding expenditures during his tenure, leading to a disciplinary inquiry. The professor challenged the preliminary inquiry and a subsequent notice via his first writ petition in 2018. While this petition was reserved for judgment, the disciplinary committee sent him a questionnaire, which...
Read More
Supreme Court Ruling: Drug Disposal Committee Cannot Overtake Court’s Power to Release Seized Vehicles
4Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Ruling: Drug Disposal Committee Cannot Overtake Court’s Power to Release Seized Vehicles

The Supreme Court held that the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 do not oust the jurisdiction of Special Courts to grant interim custody of vehicles seized under the NDPS Act. The statutory power of courts under Sections 60(3) and 63 of the NDPS Act, read with relevant CrPC/BNSS provisions for interim release, remains operative independently of the administrative disposal mechanism under the 2022 Rules. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Denash, is the owner of a lorry (TN 52 Q 0315) which was lawfully hired to transport iron sheets from Chhattisgarh to Tamil Nadu. On 14th July 2024, during transit, police intercepted the vehicle and recovered a total of 6 kilograms of Ganja. The contraband was found concealed benea...
Read More
Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Cheating Case, Slams Accused for “Misleading Courts”
19Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Cheating Case, Slams Accused for “Misleading Courts”

The Supreme Court set aside the bail orders, emphasizing that the grant of bail must consider the totality of circumstances, including the accused's conduct and antecedents. The Court held that lower courts erred by ignoring relevant factors and precedents, and by granting bail mechanically without proper application of mind to the material on record. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, M/s Netsity Systems Pvt. Ltd., filed a criminal complaint alleging that the accused respondents, a husband and wife, had cheated them of ₹1.9 crores by promising to transfer a piece of land that was already mortgaged and sold to a third party. An FIR was subsequently registered. The accused sought anticipatory bail, and the High Court granted them interim protection for nearly four years, during which media...
Read More
Supreme Court Quashes Cheating Case: Fake Fire NOC Not Needed for School Building
27Oct By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes Cheating Case: Fake Fire NOC Not Needed for School Building

The Supreme Court quashed the proceedings under Section 420 IPC, holding that the essential ingredients of cheating were not made out. As the institution's building height was below 15 metres, a Fire NOC was not legally required for affiliation; thus, the alleged false representation could not have induced the authorities to act, negating dishonest intention. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, representing JVRR Education Society, was implicated in a criminal case for allegedly using a forged No-Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Fire Department to obtain recognition and renewal of affiliation for its educational institution. The First Information Report was registered based on a complaint from the District Fire Officer, leading to a chargesheet under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code...
Read More
Justice Must Be Seen to Be Done: Supreme Court Allows Investigation into CBI Officers’ Conduct
27Oct By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Justice Must Be Seen to Be Done: Supreme Court Allows Investigation into CBI Officers’ Conduct

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's direction to register an FIR, ruling that if a complaint prima facie discloses a cognizable offence, the police are mandatorily obligated to register it under Section 154 CrPC. A preliminary inquiry report cannot oust this statutory duty or the constitutional court's power to direct an investigation, as its findings are not conclusive. The veracity of the allegations must be tested through a proper investigation. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from two separate writ petitions filed before the Delhi High Court by Sheesh Ram Saini and Vijay Aggarwal. They sought directions for the registration of an FIR against two CBI officers, Vinod Kumar Pandey and Neeraj Kumar, alleging serious misconduct. The allegations against the officers included t...
Read More
Supreme Court : Courts Can’t Reopen Departmental Inquiries; Role is to Check Procedure, Not Merits
23Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court : Courts Can’t Reopen Departmental Inquiries; Role is to Check Procedure, Not Merits

This Supreme Court judgment reaffirms the limited scope of judicial review in departmental inquiries. The Supreme Court held that constitutional courts cannot act as appellate authorities to re-examine evidence. Interference is permissible only for procedural illegality, natural justice violations, or manifest perversity, not to reassess the merits of the findings recorded by the disciplinary authority. Facts Of The Case: The respondent, Ramadhar Sao, was employed as a messenger (a Class-IV employee) with the State Bank of India. In 2008, the Bank received complaints alleging he acted as a middleman, taking bribes from customers to facilitate the sanction and disbursement of loans. A chargesheet was issued against him in 2010, accusing him of misconduct for acting as a conduit fo...
Read More
No Endless Cases: Supreme Court Uses Special Power to End Dowry Case After Couple Divorced
15Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

No Endless Cases: Supreme Court Uses Special Power to End Dowry Case After Couple Divorced

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498A/34 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the father-in-law, invoking Article 142 of the Constitution. The Court held that continuing prosecution after divorce and in the absence of specific, timely allegations amounted to an abuse of the process of law. Facts Of The Case: The marriage between the complainant (Respondent No. 2) and the appellant’s son was solemnized in December 2017. By May 2019, marital discord arose, leading the wife to leave the matrimonial home and allege mental and physical cruelty. Both parties attended police-led counselling sessions, which resulted in an agreement to remarry through Hindu rites. However, the wife soon left again and, in July 2019, filed an FIR alleging that her ...
Read More
Supreme Court Acquits Village Assistant: Merely Accepting Bribe Isn’t Enough
14Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Village Assistant: Merely Accepting Bribe Isn’t Enough

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the main accused under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as demand and acceptance of illegal gratification were proven. However, the conviction of the co-accused was set aside due to the absence of a specific charge of abetment and lack of evidence proving his connivance or independent demand for the bribe. Facts Of The Case: The case involved two government officials, A. Karunanithi (A-1), the Village Administrative Officer, and P. Karunanithi (A-2), the Village Assistant. The complainant approached A-1 to obtain a necessary community certificate for a government job. On two separate occasions, A-1 demanded a bribe of Rs. 500 from the complainant to process the application. The complainant subsequently lodged a formal...
Read More