Tag: Justice Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Reduces Life Term in POCSO Case, Cites Constitutional Protection Against Harsher Retroactive Penalties
23Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reduces Life Term in POCSO Case, Cites Constitutional Protection Against Harsher Retroactive Penalties

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 6 of the POCSO Act but modified the sentence. Relying on Article 20(1) of the Constitution, it held that the enhanced punishment of imprisonment for the remainder of natural life, introduced by the 2019 amendment, could not be applied retrospectively to an offence committed prior to its enactment. Facts Of The Case: On May 20, 2019, the appellant, Saturam Mandavi, was accused of luring a five-year-old girl to his house and raping her while her parents were away attending a marriage ceremony in the village. The victim's mother, upon returning and being unable to locate her daughter, confronted the appellant at his house, after which he fled. An FIR was subsequently registered against him. The Trial Court convicted the appellant under S...
Read More
Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail in Property Dispute Case
16Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail in Property Dispute Case

The Supreme Court cancelled the anticipatory bail granted by the Bombay High Court, holding that such relief is an "extraordinary remedy" and must not be granted routinely, especially in grave offences. The Court emphasized that concealing material facts (like a vacated injunction order) and witness intimidation vitiate bail. Custodial interrogation was deemed necessary due to the accused's non-cooperation and criminal antecedents, violating bail conditions. The ruling reaffirmed strict judicial scrutiny under Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar (2024) to prevent miscarriage of justice[ Facts Of The Case: The case involves a property dispute between Nikita Jagganath Shetty (the appellant) and her estranged husband, Vishwajeet Jadhav (respondent No. 4), along with other co-accused. Nikit...
Read More
Supreme Court Rules on Oral Family Arrangement: Legal Heirs Can’t Overturn Registered Will
16Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules on Oral Family Arrangement: Legal Heirs Can’t Overturn Registered Will

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of a registered Will executed by Metpalli Rajanna, recognizing its presumption of genuineness under law. The Court ruled that the burden to disprove the Will lay on the contesting party, which was not discharged. It emphasized that the oral family settlement, supported by possession and revenue records, further validated the Will's distribution of properties. The trial court's decree granting absolute rights to the plaintiff under the Will was restored, overturning the High Court's interference. The judgment reaffirmed the sanctity of registered Wills and family arrangements in property disputes. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a dispute over 4 acres and 16 guntas of land in Dasnapur village between the legal heirs of Metpalli Rajanna. Rajanna, ...
Read More
DNA Evidence & Last Seen Theory : Supreme Court Commutes Death Penalty to Life in Child Rape-Murder Case
12Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

DNA Evidence & Last Seen Theory : Supreme Court Commutes Death Penalty to Life in Child Rape-Murder Case

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the accused under Sections 376, 377, 302 IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act for the sexual assault and murder of a minor. However, it commuted the death penalty to life imprisonment, ruling that the case did not meet the "rarest of rare" standard due to insufficient consideration of mitigating circumstances and rehabilitation potential. The Court emphasized the necessity of balancing aggravating and mitigating factors before imposing capital punishment, following precedents like Mohd. Farooq Abdul Gafur and Gudda v. State of M.P., while affirming the reliability of DNA evidence and the last-seen theory in securing conviction. Facts Of The Case: The case involved the brutal sexual assault and murder of a 10-year-old girl in Dehradun, Uttarakhand. On 2...
Read More
Supreme Court How Contradictory Witness Testimonies Saved a Man from the Death Penalty
12Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court How Contradictory Witness Testimonies Saved a Man from the Death Penalty

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, overturning his death sentence, due to glaring inconsistencies in eyewitness testimonies (PW1, PW2) and lack of corroborative evidence. The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as recoveries were unreliable, forensic links were absent, and material contradictions undermined the case. The Court emphasized strict adherence to evidentiary standards in capital offenses. Facts Of The Case: The case involves the brutal murder of four family members—Seema Rani (the appellant’s wife), Reena Rani (sister-in-law), and two minor children, Sumani Kumari (3-4 years) and Harsh (1.5-2 years)—along with injuries to two others, Harry (5 years) and Om Prakash (18 years). The incident occurred on November 29, 2013, in the early morning at the...
Read More
Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Under Article 142 for Unhappy Couple
11Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Under Article 142 for Unhappy Couple

The Supreme Court granted divorce under Article 142 on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, citing 16 years of separation and failed reconciliation. It upheld the husband’s acquittal in a false cruelty case (IPC 498A) and enhanced maintenance to ₹15,000/month for the wife and child, prioritizing dignity over a defunct marital bond. Facts Of The Case: The marriage between Pradeep Bhardwaj (appellant-husband) and Priya (respondent-wife) was solemnized on 7 May 2008 in Delhi under Hindu rites. A son was born in 2009, who remained in the wife’s custody. The couple separated in October 2009, just over a year after marriage, and had been living apart for 16 years by the time of the Supreme Court’s judgment. The husband filed for divorce in 2010 under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu...
Read More
Conspiracy in Construction: Supreme Court Slams Builder & Officials for Violating Zoning Rules
8Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Conspiracy in Construction: Supreme Court Slams Builder & Officials for Violating Zoning Rules

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal, upholding the Kerala High Court's decision to proceed with criminal charges under Section 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Section 120-B IPC (criminal conspiracy). The Court ruled that obtaining a fraudulent permit for illegal construction in a prohibited zone constituted a criminal conspiracy with municipal officials. The attempt to regularise the unauthorised building did not absolve the appellant of liability. The Court distinguished the architect's case, noting lack of active involvement in the conspiracy. Charges were affirmed, emphasising strict enforcement of anti-corruption laws. Facts Of The Case: The case involves G. Mohandas, the owner of a building in Vanchiyoor Village, Thiruvanantha...
Read More
Supreme Court Explains : When Can Courts Quash Serious Crimes?
5Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Explains : When Can Courts Quash Serious Crimes?

The Supreme Court, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, quashed criminal proceedings—including a non-compoundable offense under Section 376 IPC—based on an amicable settlement between the parties. The Court emphasized that while such offenses are grave, exceptional circumstances (victim’s unequivocal settlement, societal harmony, and futility of trial) justified judicial intervention to prevent abuse of process. The ruling reaffirms that ends of justice override rigid legal constraints in unique cases. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from two FIRs registered in November 2023 at Mehunbare Police Station, Jalgaon. The first FIR (No. 302/2023) was filed against Madhukar and others under Sections 324, 143, 147, 452, and others of the IPC, alleging they assaulted a woman a...
Read More
Supreme Court Takes Strong Stand : No Bail for Accused in Vengeful Mob Attack
13Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Takes Strong Stand : No Bail for Accused in Vengeful Mob Attack

The Supreme Court of India overturned the High Court's bail orders, cancelling the bail granted to the respondents. The Court found the allegations to be grave, shaking the conscience of the court, and noted an imminent likelihood of the accused adversely affecting a fair trial due to their influence and non-cooperation. The trial court was directed to expedite proceedings and ensure witness protection. Facts Of The Case: The incident in question occurred on May 2, 2021, following the announcement of the Assembly election results in West Bengal. The complainant, a follower of the Hindu religion and a supporter of the Bharatiya Janata Party, alleged that he and his family faced threats and violence from supporters of the ruling dispensation in his village, Gumsima, where they were a min...
Read More
Supreme Court Exposes False Allegations, Quashes FIR in Sexual Assault Case
13Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Exposes False Allegations, Quashes FIR in Sexual Assault Case

The Supreme Court of India quashed FIRs No. 103 of 2022 and 751 of 2021, and all consequent proceedings, finding no prima facie material to substantiate allegations of cheating or sexual intercourse under false promise of marriage. The Court noted inherent contradictions in the complaints and found the complainant's allegations to be fabricated and malicious, indicating manipulative and vindictive tendencies. Facts Of The Case: The case involves Batlanki Keshav (Kesava) Kumar Anurag, the appellant, challenging an order from the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, which rejected his petition to quash FIR No. 103 of 2022. This FIR, registered at Madhapur Police Station, Cyberabad, alleges offenses under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 3(2)(v)...
Read More