Prasanna Varale Judgment - The Legal Chamber

No Civil Suit Barrier: Supreme Court Rules Criminal Trial Must Proceed in Land Scam Case

22Jul

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

No Civil Suit Barrier: Supreme Court Rules Criminal Trial Must Proceed in Land Scam Case

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in quashing criminal proceedings under Sections 120B, 415, and 420 IPC against respondents for allegedly fabricating a partition deed and family tree to exclude daughters from property compensation. It ruled that pendency of civil suits does not bar criminal prosecution if a prima facie case exists. The Court emphasized that criminal conspiracy and cheating must be tried independently, reinstating the trial court’s proceedings. The judgment reaffirms that civil and criminal remedies can coexist, ensuring accountability for fraudulent deprivation of property rights. Facts Of The Case: The case revolves around a dispute over compensation amounting to ₹33 crores awarded by the Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation for ancestral land purchased by K...

Supreme Court Clarifies Section 195 CrPC Doesn’t Protect Post-Proceeding Forgery”: Courts Records Safety

The Supreme Court ruled that Section 195 CrPC does not bar prosecution for tampering with court records after proceedings conclude, as such acts no longer affect "proceedings in court" under Section 195(1)(b). It held that fabricating documents in record rooms post-withdrawal constitutes standalone offences under IPC, not requiring court-sanctioned complaints. The judgment clarified that Section 195 applies only when offences directly impact live judicial proceedings or documents in active court custody, distinguishing between administrative record-keeping and judicial administration of justice. The Court affirmed that FIRs remain valid for post-proceeding forgeries. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a 2005 FIR lodged by the Registrar of Bharuch District Court against Parshotta...

Supreme Court Rules on Seized Sonography Machine: Order to Unseal Medical Equipment Despite Pending Appeal

The Supreme Court upheld the Gujarat High Court's order directing the release of a seized sonography machine, despite pending appeals under the PC & PNDT Act. The Court ruled that indefinite sealing of equipment is unjustified after the accused's acquittal, balancing investigative needs with the respondent's right to livelihood under Section 451 CrPC. It clarified that Section 29 of the Act does not mandate perpetual preservation of seized property during protracted litigation. The judgment emphasized pragmatic disposal of case property while safeguarding evidentiary interests through conditional data retrieval. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a 2009 sting operation where respondent Dr. Kaushik Babulal Shah, a radiologist, was accused of violating the PC & PNDT Act by...