Tag: Supreme Court of India

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Upheld: Supreme Court’s Landmark Judgment on Exam Accessibility
26Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Upheld: Supreme Court’s Landmark Judgment on Exam Accessibility

In this judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed that the constitutional guarantee of equality under Articles 14 and 21, read with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, mandates substantive inclusion, not mere formal equality. The Court directed the UPSC to implement accessible examination processes, including screen reader software and flexible scribe registration, ensuring that rights for persons with disabilities are enforceable realities. Facts Of The Case: The writ petition was instituted by Mission Accessibility, an organization dedicated to advancing the rights of persons with disabilities, seeking enforcement of their rights under the Constitution of India and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The primary grievances pertained to the Civil Services Examin...
Read More
Compromise Between Parties Leads to Early Release as Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Criminal Appeal
26Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Compromise Between Parties Leads to Early Release as Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Criminal Appeal

The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal, reducing the sentence to the period already undergone (two years and three months) while upholding the conviction. Notice had been limited to quantum of sentence. The Court considered the compromise between parties and the incarceration period served, modifying the sentence accordingly with direction for immediate release if not required in other cases. Facts Of The Case: The appellants, Venkatesh and another individual, were originally convicted by the learned III-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Salem, in S.C. No.460/2016 on November 3, 2020. The charges stemmed from Crime No.103/2016, under which they were found guilty of offenses under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to voluntarily causing g...
Read More
When One Accused Gets Relief, Others Should Too: Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Land Grab Case
26Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

When One Accused Gets Relief, Others Should Too: Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Land Grab Case

In this judgment, the Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against the appellants based on the principle of parity. Since co-accused in the same FIR had already been granted relief under Section 482 CrPC by the High Court—a decision which had attained finality—the Court held the same benefit must extend to the appellants. Facts Of The Case: Vasanthi, sister of respondent No. 2/complainant, availed a loan of Rupees Twenty Lakhs from appellant No. 2 (accused No. 5). As security for the said loan, Vasanthi executed a Power of Attorney in favour of appellant No. 1 (accused No. 4) concerning a property measuring 1980 sq. ft. situated at Villanur Revenue Village. It was alleged that appellant No. 1 fraudulently executed a sale deed in respect of the suit property in favour of h...
Read More
Supreme Court Clears Way for Occupation Certificate, Bans Construction on Recreational Plot
21Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clears Way for Occupation Certificate, Bans Construction on Recreational Plot

The Supreme Court set aside the concurrent convictions, holding that non-compliance with Section 313 CrPC vitiates a fair trial. The trial court's failure to put each material circumstance individually to the appellants caused prejudice. The Court remanded the matter for de novo examination from the stage of recording Section 313 statements, emphasizing this mandatory procedural requirement. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from an incident on March 31, 2016, when the informant, Kachan Pasi, along with his father Ghughali Pasi, mother Kouta Devi, and sister-in-law Dharmsheela Devi, were returning from their fields. They were allegedly surrounded by several accused persons, including the three appellants before the Supreme Court—Chandan Pasi, Pappu Pasi, and Gidik Pasi. The accu...
Read More
Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Land Deal Fraud Case Citing Civil Settlement
21Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Land Deal Fraud Case Citing Civil Settlement

In this judgment, the Supreme Court exercised its plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution to quash criminal proceedings solely against the appellant, based on a full and final settlement between the private parties. The Court clarified that such quashing would not impede the prosecution of other accused, who must be pursued independently. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a dispute over the sale of a plot of land in Burari, Delhi. Respondent No. 2, while searching for land to build a house, was introduced by the appellant, Mool Chand, who claimed to be a reputed real estate agent. The appellant represented that he had an encumbrance-free plot suitable for the complainant, owned by his associate, accused No. 2, who needed urgent funds. Consequently,...
Read More
Can’t Terminate Compassionate Appointment for Failing Exam? Supreme Court Orders Lower Post Instead
18Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Can’t Terminate Compassionate Appointment for Failing Exam? Supreme Court Orders Lower Post Instead

The Supreme Court held that compassionate appointment schemes must be interpreted liberally to fulfill their humanitarian purpose, and procedural rigidity cannot override welfare objectives. It distinguished compassionate appointment from direct recruitment, ruling that reallocating a candidate to a lower post without essential qualifications does not violate equality clauses if it preserves the scheme's beneficial character. Facts Of The Case: The respondent, Harpal Singh, is the son of a deceased government employee who died in harness on February 28, 2019. Pursuant to the Madhya Pradesh compassionate appointment policy, he was appointed to the post of Assistant Grade-III on September 11, 2020. His appointment order contained a specific condition, derived from Clause 6.5 of the governi...
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
Bail Orders Without Reasons Are Invalid: Supreme Court Remands Case for Fresh Consideration
14Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Bail Orders Without Reasons Are Invalid: Supreme Court Remands Case for Fresh Consideration

This Supreme Court judgment establishes that parity cannot be the sole ground for granting bail; it must focus on the accused's specific role. Bail orders must contain reasons, reflecting application of mind to relevant factors like offence gravity. Granting bail solely based on another accused's release, without considering role distinction, renders the order legally unsustainable. Facts Of The Case: The factual matrix of this case originates from a First Information Report (FIR) lodged on 22nd April 2024, alleging the murder of the deceased, Sonveer. According to the complainant, Sonveer, along with his brothers Sagar (the appellant) and Pramod, were en route to their fields on a motorcycle when they were confronted by a group of six individuals, including the respondents Rajveer...
Read More
Supreme Court Acquits Two Men After 35 Years Due to “Defective Trial” and Missing Evidence
14Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Two Men After 35 Years Due to “Defective Trial” and Missing Evidence

The Supreme Court held that a defective Section 313 CrPC statement, with only generic questions failing to put specific incriminating circumstances, causes grave prejudice and vitiates trial. Non-examination of a material Investigating Officer attracts adverse inference. Subsequent FIR superseding the original constitutes an embellished statement under Section 161 CrPC. Defence witnesses carry equal evidentiary value to prosecution witnesses. Facts Of The Case: On 11th May 1990, Gajendra Prasad Gupta was assaulted and fatally injured while returning from a village fair. His father, Rameshwar Sahu, initially gave a Fardbeyan on 12th May 1990 before ASI R. Paswan, which was treated as FIR. This statement described an altercation at the sweet stall and a subsequent attack by three uni...
Read More