Tag: Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Stops Misuse of Rape Laws : No Rape If Relationship Was Consensual
12Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Stops Misuse of Rape Laws : No Rape If Relationship Was Consensual

The Supreme Court of India quashed criminal proceedings against the Appellant, finding that the alleged sexual assault and unnatural sex charges under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 377, 504, and 506 of the IPC were not established. The Court held that the relationship was consensual, not based on a false promise to marry, and the complaint was likely motivated by a "disgruntled state of mind". The case fell under categories for quashing criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process of law. Facts Of The Case: This appeal arises from the dismissal of Amol Bhagwan Nehul's petition to quash Criminal Case C.R. No. 490/2023, registered on July 31, 2023, for alleged offenses under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 377, 504, and 506 IPC. The Complainant, Respondent No. 2, alleged that the Appellant forci...
Read More
Affidavits & Fair Trial: Why the Supreme Court Overturned a Murder Conviction
12Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Affidavits & Fair Trial: Why the Supreme Court Overturned a Murder Conviction

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellants, setting aside their conviction under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC, due to serious doubts about the prosecution's case. The investigation was deemed unfair because the investigating officer suppressed affidavits from three eyewitnesses (PW-5, PW-6, PW-7) that favored the accused, and failed to conduct further investigation based on these affidavits. The Court found it unsafe to convict solely on PW-4's testimony given the suppressed material. Facts Of The Case: Sakhawat and Mehndi, appellant nos. 1 and 2 respectively, appealed a judgment from the High Court of Allahabad dated October 9, 2018, which upheld their conviction for offenses under Section 302 and Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I...
Read More
Sand Mining Case: Supreme Court Explains State’s Power to Fix DMF Charges for Minor Minerals
12Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Sand Mining Case: Supreme Court Explains State’s Power to Fix DMF Charges for Minor Minerals

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals challenging demand notices for depositing 10% of the total bid amount with the District Mineral Foundation (DMF). The Court held that Section 9B of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, is inapplicable to minor minerals due to Section 14. The State Government is empowered under Section 15A to fix the amount payable to the DMF for minor minerals. The Court found the demand consistent with statutory provisions and the 2017 Rules Facts Of The Case: Chandra Bhan Singh, a successful bidder for mining minor minerals (sand), was allotted a tender. In line with the Policy decision dated April 22, 2017, the Appellant was required to deposit an amount of ₹54,12,960/-, representing 10% of the total bid amount of ₹5,41,29,600/-, to the Dis...
Read More
Big Relief for Mothers: Supreme Court Backs Woman’s Right to Benefit After Remarriage
11Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Big Relief for Mothers: Supreme Court Backs Woman’s Right to Benefit After Remarriage

The Supreme Court ruled that K. Umadevi is entitled to maternity leave under FR 101(a), setting aside the High Court Division Bench's decision. The Court emphasized a purposive and liberal interpretation of maternity benefit provisions, aligning with reproductive rights under Article 21 of the Constitution and international conventions, irrespective of prior children not in the mother's custody or born from a previous marriage. Facts Of The Case: K. Umadevi, the appellant, married A. Suresh in 2006, having two children from this wedlock in 2007 and 2011. Their marriage was dissolved in 2017, and the children remained in the custody of her former husband. In December 2012, she joined government service as an English Teacher in Tamil Nadu. On September 12, 2018, the appellant remarried M...
Read More
SARFAESI Act’s Section 11: Supreme Court Affirms Mandatory Arbitration for Financial Institutions
11Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

SARFAESI Act’s Section 11: Supreme Court Affirms Mandatory Arbitration for Financial Institutions

The Supreme Court, in Bank of India vs. M/s Sri Nangli Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd., ruled that Section 11 of the SARFAESI Act is mandatory, requiring inter-se disputes between banks and financial institutions concerning secured assets to be resolved through arbitration. No explicit arbitration agreement is needed; the provision legally mandates it, thereby divesting DRT of jurisdiction in such matters. Facts Of The Case: In the case of Bank of India vs. M/s Sri Nangli Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., the core dispute involved the priority of charge over secured assets (stocks of paddy and rice) belonging to a common borrower, M/s Sri Nangli Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd., between two public sector banks: Bank of India (appellant) and Punjab National Bank (respondent). Both banks had extended credit facil...
Read More
Grounds for Arrest: The Supreme Court’s Latest Verdict on Constitutional Safeguards
11Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Grounds for Arrest: The Supreme Court’s Latest Verdict on Constitutional Safeguards

The Supreme Court addressed the legality of arrest and compliance with constitutional mandates under Article 22, specifically concerning the prompt furnishing of grounds for arrest. The judgment deliberated on the application of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and the Prevention of Corruption Act, affirming adherence to due process in arrest procedures. Facts Of The Case: This appeal originated from a writ petition filed before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, seeking a writ of habeas corpus on the grounds of alleged illegal arrest and unlawful detention of Kessireddy Raja Shekhar Reddy, the appellant's son. He was arrested by the CID in connection with offenses purportedly committed under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The core contention in t...
Read More
Supreme Court Mandates Timely Promotions and Cadre Review for CAPF Officers
11Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Mandates Timely Promotions and Cadre Review for CAPF Officers

The Supreme Court affirmed Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) as 'Organized Group-A Services,' entitling officers to Non-Functional Financial Upgradation. It directed a six-month cadre review and recruitment rule revision. The Court also suggested progressively reducing IPS deputation posts in CAPFs to address officer stagnation and grievances Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a long-standing grievance of officers belonging to the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) – including CRPF, BSF, SSB, ITBP, and CISF. These officers sought recognition of their services as 'Organized Group-A Services' (OGAS), a crucial classification for ensuring parity with other Group-A services and entitlement to benefits such as Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU). A primary co...
Read More
CDs as Evidence: Supreme Court Clarifies Rules for Production in CBI Case
11Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

CDs as Evidence: Supreme Court Clarifies Rules for Production in CBI Case

The Supreme Court upheld that additional documents can be produced by the prosecution even after the charge sheet is filed, especially if inadvertently omitted. The Court reiterated that Section 173(5) of the CrPC is directory, not mandatory, and permits the production of documents gathered before or after investigation with court permission. The judgment clarifies that the authenticity of such documents remains an open issue to be proved during trial. Facts Of The Case: An FIR was registered on May 3, 2013, for offences under the IPC and the PC Act. The dispute involves two Compact Discs (CDs). Between January 8, 2013, and May 1, 2013, the Ministry of Home Affairs permitted the interception of telephone calls of several accused and one Manoj Garg. On May 4 and May 10, 2013, two CDs cont...
Read More
Supreme Court : No More Delays! High Court Must Decide Property Dispute in 6 Months
10Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court : No More Delays! High Court Must Decide Property Dispute in 6 Months

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's second remand order for de-novo disposal, finding it erroneous given the possibility of deciding the appeal based on the interpretation of existing documents (sale deed, conveyance deed, and settlement deed). The Court directed the High Court to decide the appeal on its merits expeditiously within six months. Facts Of The Case: This appeal challenges a judgment from the High Court of Kerala, which set aside a trial court's dismissal of a suit and remanded the matter for de-novo disposal. The dispute concerns 9 cents of land in Poomthura Village, Ernakulam. The appellant's father executed a sale deed in 1955 for "Verumpattom Rights" over land in Survey No. 1236. Later, in 1964, he executed a conveyance deed for "Jenmam ...
Read More
Supreme Court : Sale Deeds Executed After Property Power of Attorney Revoked Are Invalid
10Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court : Sale Deeds Executed After Property Power of Attorney Revoked Are Invalid

The Supreme Court clarified that an unregistered agreement to sell or power of attorney does not confer title or interest in immovable property. The Court emphasized that property transfer requires a registered deed of conveyance. It also ruled that a plaint cannot be rejected entirely under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if even one distinct cause of action is triable. Facts Of The Case: Vinod Infra Developers Ltd. (appellant) claimed ownership of agricultural land and obtained a loan of Rs. 7.5 crores from Mahaveer Lunia (Respondent No. 1) in May 2014. The appellant's Board of Directors authorized their Managing Director and Respondent No. 1 to sell the property. Subsequently, an unregistered power of attorney and agreement to sell were executed in favor of Respondent No. 1 on May 24, 2014.In A...
Read More