heinous crime - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Converts Life Imprisonment to 25 Years in POCSO Matter: Here’s Why the Court Showed Leniency

12Feb

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Converts Life Imprisonment to 25 Years in POCSO Matter: Here’s Why the Court Showed Leniency

The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal, upholding the conviction under Section 376(3) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Exercising its sentencing power, the Court commuted the sentence of life imprisonment until natural death to a fixed term of 25 years of actual imprisonment without the benefit of remission, citing the appellant's age, clean antecedents, and satisfactory jail conduct. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from FIR No. 08/2022, registered on 04.05.2022, against the appellant, Deepankar Tikedar. The allegations pertained to the commission of sexual offences against a minor girl, who was reportedly between 15 to 16 years of age at the time of the incident. The appellant was subsequently tried and convicted by the Trial Court under Section 376(3) of the Indian Pe...

Supreme Court Acquits Man in POCSO Death Penalty Case Citing Procedural Flaws

23Dec

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Man in POCSO Death Penalty Case Citing Procedural Flaws

This Supreme Court judgment sets aside the appellant's conviction and death sentence, holding that the trial was vitiated due to a denial of fair trial rights, including inadequate legal representation and failure to provide documents. The prosecution's circumstantial evidence—last seen, CCTV footage, disclosure statements, and DNA reports—was found unreliable and unproven beyond reasonable doubt. Facts Of The Case: A seven-year-old girl went missing on February 5, 2017, from her residence in Chengalpet, Tamil Nadu, while her parents were out shopping. After an unsuccessful search, a missing persons report was filed. Investigations, including reviewing CCTV footage from a nearby temple, led the police to suspect the appellant, Dashwanth, a neighbour residing in the same building. He was ...

Supreme Court: Delay or Criminal Antecedents Alone Cannot Cancel Bail

13Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Delay or Criminal Antecedents Alone Cannot Cancel Bail

The Supreme Court clarified the distinction between bail cancellation and revocation, emphasizing that revocation is permissible if the initial bail order was perverse or illegal. The Court reiterated that while ensuring a fair trial is paramount, the principle of "bail, not jail" prevails, and stringent conditions can adequately mitigate risks of witness tampering or evidence influence. Facts Of The Case: A First Information Report was registered on 19th December 2021 against unknown persons for offences including murder, following the death of a victim who was allegedly followed and brutally attacked by a group due to political enmity. The appellants, identified as activists of a political organization, were subsequently arrested. In December 2022, after nearly a year in cu...

Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling: No Special Treatment for Celebrities in Bail Matters

17Sep

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling: No Special Treatment for Celebrities in Bail Matters

The Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted by the High Court, holding that the order was perverse and suffered from non-application of mind to material facts, including the gravity of the offence and prima facie evidence. The Court reiterated that bail in serious offences like murder requires careful consideration of the allegations, evidence, and risk of witness tampering, and cannot be granted mechanically. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from the brutal murder of Renukaswamy, a resident of Chitradurga, whose body was discovered near an apartment in Bengaluru on June 9, 2024. The prosecution alleged that the murder was a result of a criminal conspiracy orchestrated by actor Darshan (A2) and his partner, Pavithra Gowda (A1), after the deceased had sent obscene messages to A1's Insta...

Influencing Witnesses? Supreme Court Sets Strict Rules for Granting Bail in Serious Crimes

17Sep

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Influencing Witnesses? Supreme Court Sets Strict Rules for Granting Bail in Serious Crimes

The Supreme Court reiterated that bail grant requires a balanced assessment of the nature and gravity of the offence, the prima facie case, and the accused's potential to influence the trial or evade justice. It set aside the High Court's bail order for failing to consider these established parameters, particularly the accused's conduct and the crime's seriousness. Facts Of The Case: The case stems from an FIR registered concerning a violent incident on the intervening night of May 4-5, 2021. The accused, Sushil Kumar, and his associates were alleged to have abducted several individuals from different locations in Delhi and taken them to Chhatrasal Stadium. There, they were violently attacked with wooden sticks and lathis, and gunshots were allegedly fired. One of the abducted in...

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied: Supreme Court Orders Fresh Bail Hearing for Convict

8Sep

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied: Supreme Court Orders Fresh Bail Hearing for Convict

The Supreme Court reiterated the legal principle that appellate courts should liberally suspend sentences of fixed short-term imprisonment during the pendency of an appeal to prevent the appeal itself from becoming infructuous. It held that denial requires recording exceptional, compelling reasons why release would be against public interest. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Aasif @ Pasha, was convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court in Meerut for offences under the POCSO Act, IPC (Sections 354, 354Kha, 323, 504), and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The sentences, which included terms of four years of rigorous imprisonment for the major charges, were ordered to run concurrently. Dissatisfied with the conviction, the appellant filed a criminal appeal before the Allahabad High...

Can’t Claim Juvenile Benefit Based on Weak Evidence: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling

29Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Can’t Claim Juvenile Benefit Based on Weak Evidence: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled that a school transfer certificate based solely on an oral declaration, without corroborating proof, is unreliable for determining juvenility. When such evidence conflicts with official documents like a family register, voter list, and medical opinion, the latter must be given precedence to prevent the abuse of benevolent legislation. Facts Of The Case: On August 31, 2011, the appellant's brother, Rajesh, was shot and killed. The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against Liliu Singh and his son, Devi Singh (Respondent No. 2), under Sections 302 (murder) and 452 (house-trespass) of the Indian Penal Code. The incident allegedly occurred after Liliu Singh and Devi Singh forcibly entered the appellant's house and manhandled his wife. When Rajesh went to confro...