Email: civilreports@hotmail.com
Website: lawmirror.com

Postal Regd.No.G/CHD/0068/09-11.
Annual Subsc. (Four Vols.) Rs.1360/-

Now Law also available in Electronic Media

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.161 - Witness - Examination during investigation - Delay - Independent witnesses coming forward after seeing accused's photographs in the media - No error in recording their statements. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 829 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.161 - Witness - Examination during investigation - Delay - Not a ground to create doubt regarding the veracity of the prosecution's case - Unless the investigating officer is categorically asked as to why there was delay in examination of the witnesses the defence cannot gain any advantage therefrom - If the explanation offered for delayed examination is plausible and possible and the Court accepts the same as plausible there is no reason to interfere with the conclusion. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 829 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.167(2), 309(2) - Charge sheet filed - Cognizance of offence taken - Accused on bail - For further investigation police remand for custodial interrogation cannot be granted without cancelling bail. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 942 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.173(2) - Report u/s 173(2) - Informant is entitled to a notice and an opportunity of hearing at the time of consideration of the report. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 687 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.173(2) - Report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. - Magistrate when decides not to take cognizance and to drop the proceedings or takes a view that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against some of the persons mentioned in the FIR, notice to informant and grant of opportunity of being heard in the matter becomes mandatory. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 687 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.174 - Inquest report - Name of accused not in inquest report - Held that object of proceedings u/s 174 Cr.P.C. is merely to ascertain whether a person has died under suspicious circumstances or an unnatural death and if so what is the apparent cause of death - Held, that the details as to how the deceased was assaulted or who assaulted him are foreign to the scope of proceeding u/s 174 Cr.P.C. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 744 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.211 - Charge - Finding or sentence not to be set aside merely on the ground that a charge was not framed or that charge was defective unless it has occasioned prejudice. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 762 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.211 - Charge - Non framing of - Mere omission to mention provision of law - At the highest may be considered as an irregularity - No prejudice shown - Conviction and sentence not at all affected. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 762 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.258 - Power to stop proceedings - FIR u/ss 447, 341, 323, 427 IPC - Charge sheet filed - Accused could not be served - Since all the offences were triable as summons case, Magistrate stopped proceedings u/s 258 Cr.P.C. - Thereafter on the application of prosecution, Magistrate reopened the case and issued non bailable warrants against accused - Accused applied u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing order of Magistrate - Held, Magistrate has power to revive the proceedings but he should have passed an appropriate order upon application of mind - Magistrate did not record any reasons - Case remanded back to Magistrate to decide application of prosecution afresh. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 889 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.294(3) - Document - Genuineness not disputed by the opposite party - It can be read as substantive evidence. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 843 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.299 - Both the conditions in first part of S.299 Cr.P.C. must be read conjunctively and not disjunctively - Satisfaction of one of the requirements is not sufficient. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.299 - For invoking S.299 Cr.P.C. Magistrate is required to hold that accused was absconding on that date. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.299 - Once a person is arrested and/or is otherwise capable of being brought to Court, the proclamation ceases to have any effect. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.313 - Conviction based on accused's failure to explain what he was never asked to explain is bad in law. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 934 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.313 - Each material circumstance should be put simply and separately in a way that an illiterate mind, or one which is perturbed or confused, can readily appreciate and understand. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 934 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.313 - Object - It is to give accused an opportunity to explain the case made against him - This statement can be taken into consideration in judging his innocence or guilt. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 934 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.320, Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Compounding - Held, that offence u/s 302 IPC is non compoundable - Except in some marginal cases, Court should not allow composition of offence - If parties have settled their disputes, they may live in peace in future, but the same by itself cannot be a ground to pass a judgment of acquittal. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 744 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.320 - Bank loan - Defrauding of Bank - Bank officials also involved - Civil suit for recovery of loan as well as initiation of criminal proceedings - Settlement arrived at by and between the creditor and debtor - Offence committed as such does not come to an end. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 753 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378 - Acquittal - Appeal against - (1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded; (2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law; (3) Various expressions, such as, "substantial and compelling reasons", "good and sufficient grounds", "very strong circumstances", "distorted conclusions", "glaring mistakes", etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal - Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion; (4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused - Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court; (5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 782 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378 - Appeal against acquittal - Appellate Court not to interfere with a judgment of acquittal only because another view is possible - If two views are possible, it is trite, the appellate court shall not interfere. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 806 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378 - Appeal against acquittal - Both questions of fact and of law are open to determination by High Court in an appeal against acquittal - High Court can reappreciate, review and reconsider the evidence. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 782 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378 - Appeal against acquittal - Presumption of innocence of accused is further reinforced by order of acquittal - Finding of trial Court can be reversed only for very substantial and compelling reasons. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 782 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.436 - Bail in bailable offence - Bail can be granted without notice to complainant. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 825 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.436 - Bailable offence - Bail - Cancellation - A persona accused of a bailable offence is entitled to be released on bail pending his trial but he forfeits his right to be released on bail if his conduct subsequent to his release is found to be prejudicial to a fair trial - Forfeiture can be made effective by invoking the inherent powers of the High Court u/s 482 of the Code. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 825 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.437, 209 - Bail - Granted by High Court - Appeal by complainant - High Court while considering bail application should not have recorded a definite conclusion about non possibility of the injuries having been sustained in the manner indicated by the prosecution - Complainant and independent eye witnesses threatened by accused - Bail not cancelled keeping in view that accused is on bail for considerable length of time - Trial ordered to be completed within three months - In case complainant or any witness seeks protection for appearance before Court during trial, the same shall be provided by the concerned police officials. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 710 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438 - Anticipatory bail - Grant of - Guidelines laid down by Constitution Bench which the Courts are required to keep in mind while dealing with an application for grant of anticipatory bail reiterated. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 882 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438 - Anticipatory bail - Grant of - It will not amount to interference in investigation. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 882 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438 - Anticipatory bail can be granted while a case is under investigation. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 882 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438 - Grant of anticipatory bail and cancellation of anticipatory bail has to be considered or dealt with on different basis - Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of bail already granted. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 882 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Exercise of power by High Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. - Principles governing - Analysed. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 860 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Exercise of power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. - Permissible when action on the part of the complainant is mala fide. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 738 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Exercise of power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. - Permissible when allegations in complaint even if taken to be correct on its face value do not disclose commission of an offence. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 738 (S.C.)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.482, 178, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.420, 406 - Territorial jurisdiction - Parties married at Jalandhar thereafter living in Canada - Demand of dowry made in Canada - FIR lodged at Jalandhar - FIR quashed, on the ground that larger part of offence was committed in Canada. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 794 (S.C.)

Criminal trial

 Criminal trial - It is always open to a Court to differentiate accused who had been acquitted from those who were convicted where there are a number of accused persons. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 914 (S.C.)

 Criminal trial - Maxim "falsus in uno falsus in omnibus" - Has no application in India - Where chaff can be separated from grain, it would be open to the Court to convict an accused notwithstanding the fact that evidence has been found to be deficient, or to be not wholly credible - Falsity of material particular would not ruin it from the beginning to end. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 914 (S.C.)

Custodial disappearance

 Custodial disappearance - Compensation - Order as to - While directing payment of compensation High Court observed that such act was attributable to the remissness and failure of duty on the part of police department since police was unable to find the whereabouts of respondent's husband - Observations clearly unsustainable as they are bound to have effect on the pending trial - Amount of compensation upheld. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 900 (S.C.)

 Custodial torture/death - Article 21 of Constitution mandates that no person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law - Life or personal liberty includes a right to live with human dignity - There is an inbuilt guarantee against torture or assault by the State or its functionaries - There is hardly direct ocular evidence of complicity of police personnel in cases of police torture or custodial death - Courts must, therefore, deal with such cases in a realistic manner and with the sensitivity which they deserve, otherwise the common man may tend to gradually lose faith in the efficacy of the system of judiciary itself. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 894 (S.C.)

Discrepancies

 Discrepancies - In evidence of eye witnesses - Changing the place of occurrence and the manner in which the alleged occurrence took place - By itself sufficient to doubt the veracity of the prosecution version. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 742 (S.C.)

 Discrepancies - Normal and material discrepancies - Difference - Normal discrepancies in evidence are those which are due to normal errors of observation, normal errors of memory due to lapse of time, due to mental disposition such as shock and horror at the time of occurrence and those are always there however honest and truthful a witness may be - Material discrepancies are those which are not normal, and not expected of a normal person - While normal discrepancies do not corrode the credibility of a party's case, material discrepancies do so. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 914 (S.C.)

 Discrepancies - Trial is not rendered fatal for minor contradictions in the prosecution version. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 843 (S.C.)

Evidence Act, 1872

 Evidence - Appreciation - Prosecution version to be judged as a whole - While appreciating evidence approach of Court should be integrated and not truncated or isolated - Court has to appreciate in reaching the conclusion about the guilt of the accused, analyse and assess the evidence placed before it by the yardstick of probabilities, its intrinsic value and the animus of the witnesses. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 829 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.3 - Evidence - Must be proved - Existence of an evidence is not enough - Application of mind by Court is imperative. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.3 - Evidentiary value - Can be tested during trial. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 719 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.9 - Identification in Court foth=25 height=20> Evidence Act, 1872, S.9 - Identification in Court for the first time - Much credence is not given to identification made in Court for the first time and that too after a long time. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 776 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.9 - Identification of accused in Court - Much evidentiary value cannot be attached to the identification of the accused for the first time in Court where identifying witness is a total stranger who had just a fleeting glimpse of the person identified or who had no particular reason to remember the person concerned. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.9 - Test identification parade - Do not constitute substantive evidence - They are primarily meant for the purpose of helping the investigating agency. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.9 - Test identification parade - Failure to hold a test identification parade would not make inadmissible the evidence of identification in Court. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.9 - Test identification parade - It is desirable that a test identification parade should be conducted as soon as accused is arrested - This becomes necessary to eliminate the possibility of the accused being shown to the witnesses prior to the test identification parade. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.9 - Test identification parade - The necessity for holding an identification parade can arise only when the accused are not previously known to the witnesses. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.27 - Recoveries and discoveries - Duly proved - No infirmity in impugned judgment. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 829 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.32 - Dying declaration - Court once satisfied that dying declaration was true and voluntary, undoubtedly, can base its conviction on the same without any further corroboration. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 758 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.32 - Dying declaration - Principles governing - (i) There is neither rule of law nor of prudence that dying declaration cannot be acted upon without corroboration; (ii) If the court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary it can base conviction on it, without corroboration; (iii) The court has to scrutinise the dying declaration carefully and must ensure that the declaration is not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination - The deceased had an opportunity to observe and identify the assailants and was in a fit state to make the declaration; (iv) Where a dying declaration is suspicious, it should not be acted upon without corroborative evidence; (v) Where the deceased was unconscious and could never make any dying declaration the evidence with regard to it is to be rejected; (vi) A dying declaration which suffers from infirmity cannot form the basis of conviction; (vii) Merely because a dying declaration does not contain the details as to the occurrence, it is not to be rejected; (viii) Equally, merely because it is a brief statement, it is not to be discarded - On the contrary, the shortness of the statement itself guarantees truth; (ix) Normally, the court in order to satisfy whether the deceased was in a fit mental condition to make the dying declaration looks up to the medical opinion - But where the eyewitness said that the deceased was in a fit and conscious state to make the dying declaration, the medical opinion cannot prevail; (x) Where the prosecution version differs from the version as given in the dying declaration, the said declaration cannot be acted upon; (xi) Where there are more than one statements in the nature of dying declaration, the one first in point of time must be preferred - Of course, if the plurality of the dying declaration could be held to be trustworthy and reliable, it has to be accepted. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 758 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, Ss.40 to 43 - Finding in a criminal proceeding - Not binding in a civil proceeding. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 851 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.43 - Judgment of civil court - Relevancy of in a criminal proceeding - Held, judgment of a tribunal in a civil proceeding rendered on basis of settlement entered into by and between the parties is not of much relevance in a criminal proceeding. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 753 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.113-B - Presumption - Available only on proof the following essentials : (1) The question before the court must be whether the accused has committed the dowry death of a woman. (This means that the presumption can be raised only if the accused is being tried for the offence under Section 304-B IPC.); (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives; (3) Such cruelty or harassment was for, or in connection with any demand for dowry; (4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 936 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.114 Illus.(g) - Material evidence withheld by a party - Court may draw adverse inference notwithstanding that onus of proof was not on such party and that party was not called upon to produce the said evidence. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 848 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.138 - Cross examination - Right of - Apart from being a natural right is a statutory right - If an exception is to be carved out, the statute must say so expressly or the same must be capable of being inferred by necessary implication. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

Fair Trial

 Fair Trial - An accused is always entitled to a fair trial as also a speedy trial - But his rights are not absolute and he cannot interfere with the governmental priority to proceed with the trial - At the same time it is necessary to maintain judicial dignity and decorum. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

Identification

 Identification - From voice - Calling by name by one accused to the other - Accused not known previously - Not sufficient to identify the accused when incident takes place in an isolated area and that too on a dark night. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 776 (S.C.)

Indian Penal Code, 1860

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.97 to 102 - Private defence - Right of - Cannot be raised because the accused suffered some minor injuries or the prosecution has not explained the same. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 818 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.107 - Abetment - A person abets the doing of a thing when (1) he instigates any person to do that thing; or (2) engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing; or (3) intentionally aids, by act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. These things are essential to complete abetment as a crime. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 707 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.120-B - Criminal conspiracy - When trustworthy evidence establishing all links of circumstantial evidence is available, the confession of a co-accused as to conspiracy even without corroborative evidence can be taken into consideration. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 829 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.149 - Common object is different from a "common intention" as it does not require a prior concert and a common meeting of minds before the attack - It is enough if each has the same object in view and their number is five or more and that they act as an assembly to achieve that object - "Common object" of an assembly is to be ascertained from the acts and language of the members composing it, and from a consideration of all the surrounding circumstances. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 951 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.149 - Unlawful assembly - Emphasis in the provision is on common object and not on common intention - Mere presence in an unlawful assembly cannot render a person liable unless there was a common object and he was actuated by that common object - Where common object of an unlawful assembly is not proved, the accused persons cannot be convicted with the help of S.149 IPC. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 951 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.149 - Unlawful assembly - Common object can reasonably be collected from the nature of the assembly, arms it carries and behaviour at or before or after the scene of incident. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.149 - Unlawful assembly - It is not necessary for prosecution to prove which of the members of the unlawful assembly did which or what act. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.149 - Unlawful assembly - Object - Meaning - Means the purpose or design and in order to make it "common" it must be shared by all. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 951 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.149 - Unlawful assembly - The crucial question to determine is whether the assembly consisted of five or more persons and whether the said persons entertained one or more of the common objects as specified in S.141 IPC - It cannot be laid down as a general proposition of law that unless an overt act is proved against a person, who is alleged to be a member of an unlawful assembly, it cannot be said that he is a member of an assembly - The only thing required is that he should have understood that the assembly was unlawful and was likely to commit any of the acts which fall within the purview of S.141 IPC. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 951 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.149 - Unlawful assembly - Where common object of an unlawful assembly is not proved, the accused persons cannot be convicted with the help of Section 149. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.201, 302, 376, 373 - Rape and murder of girl aged 6 years - Testimonies of all the four eye witnesses found cogent and reliable - There were only insignificant and minor contradictions in their evidence and all the four PW's are consistent in their version in material aspects - Also held that omissions of names of two PW's in FIR is not material as it is not necessary to name witnesses in FIR - Underwear of accused were found stained with human semen - Chemical examination of vaginal smear of victim confirmed - Presence of human blood, semen and spermatozoa - Medical evidence proved that victim died of homicidal death and she was raped before being murdered - No evidence that PW's had any enmity with appellants - Appellants were seen throwing dead body of victim by PW's - Conviction upheld. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 901 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.300, Exception 4 - Help of S.300 Exception 4 can be invoked if death is caused (a) without premeditation, (b) in a sudden fight; (c) without the offender's having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner; and (d) the fight must have been with the person killed - To bring a case within Exception 4 all the ingredients mentioned in it must be found. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 964 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.300 Exception 4 - For bringing in operation of S.300 Exception 4 IPC it has to be established that the act was committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel without the offender having taken undue advantage and not having acted in a cruel or unusual manner. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 964 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.300 Exception 4 - Heat of passion - Requires that there must be no time for the passions to cool down. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 964 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.300 Exception 4 - S.300 Exception 4 applies when death is caused (a) without premeditation, (b) in a sudden fight; (c) without the offender's having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner; and (d) the fight must have been with the person killed - To bring a case within Exception 4 all the ingredients mentioned in it must be found. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 863 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.300 Exception 4 - Undue advantage means unfair advantage. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 964 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 149, 148 - Three different stories projected by prosecution - Unsafe to convict accused in facts and circumstances of the case. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 929 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 307, 149, 148 and 341 - Death of D1 and D2 homicidal - Grave and serious injuries to PW1 - Evidence of doctor clear, categorical and unambiguous that PW1 was in a fit condition to give statement - Statement of PW1 recorded by PW11 in presence of doctor wherein he gave detailed version of incident - His testimony corroborated by medical evidence - PW3 another injured witness gave similar statement - Both PW1 and PW3 family members of deceased - No reason as to why they would let real culprits go scot free - Accused members of unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons committed offence in prosecution of common object - Conviction upheld. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 762 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 34 - Conviction by trial Court u/s 302, 34 - High Court altered conviction to one u/s 304 Part I IPC by opining that accused merely exceeded their right of private defence - Right of private defence not available because accused suffered some minor injuries - Accused never put forth plea of right of private defence - High Court committed serious error in holding that accused exercised their right of private defence or exceeded the same - Accused kept the gun loaded and used for wrongful purpose - Testimony of PW1 and PW2 reliable and trustworthy and also corroborated by medical evidence - Case falls within purview of S.300 Thirdly IPC - State appeal allowed. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 818 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 341 - Appellant was armed with knife - Appellant ordered for personal search of deceased - When deceased resisted he was not only thrashed but given fatal injury - No evidence of scuffle - Not a case of sudden fight - Exception 4 to S.300 IPC not applicable to the facts of the case - Order of High Court convicting appellant u/s 302 IPC confirmed. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 863 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 341, 307, 34 - Acquittal by trial Court - Conviction by High Court - FIR promptly lodged - Copy of FIR forwarded to Magistrate without delay - Evidence of PW1 relating to attack on deceased corroborated by documentary evidence and oral testimony of PWs.4, 11, 2 & 3 - PW3 independent witness and her house located opposite the place of occurrence - Blood stained soil seized from there - Her testimony cogent and credible - Appeal dismissed. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 681 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 498-A - Death in matrimonial home - Acquittal by trial Court - Conviction by High Court - No mark of violence - Charge u/s 498-A or S.4 of Dowry Prohibition Act held not established by both Courts below - Prosecution story suggesting strong motive on part of appellant to commit murder ruled out - Plea of alibi not proved - Not sufficient to arrive at a verdict of guilt - Prosecution is required to prove all other circumstances - If two views are possible High Court was not required to interfere - Circumstances do not lead to a definite conclusion that appellant committed the offence - Conviction set aside. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 866 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 498-A - Husband and wife remained within four walls of a house - Death by homicide - It is the husband who is to explain the circumstances in which deceased died - However, it may be considered to be a strong circumstance but that by alone in absence of any evidence of violence on the deceased cannot be held to be conclusive - It may be difficult to arrive at a conclusion that the husband alone was responsible therefor. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 866 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Conviction - Accused 7 in number armed with various weapons attacked a person and caused his death - FIR lodged immediately - No villager deposed in favour of either of the parties as there was long standing enmity between two branches of the same family - If witnesses are not independent, that is no ground to discard the prosecution case - Also held in such a case witnesses may not be able to attribute specific role to each of the accused persons - Conviction of appellants u/s 302 affirmed. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 744 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Indiscriminate firing - Death of three persons travelling in a bullock cart - Person driving bullock cart did not suffer any injury - Prosecution did not explain as to how the person driving the bullock cart did not suffer any injury while those sitting behind him in the bullock cart sustained serious injuries resulting in their death - Acquittal upheld. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 742 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Related witness - Brother of deceased - Four eye witnesses did not support the prosecution version - Testimony of eye witness who happens to be brother of deceased found trustworthy and reliable - He gave the minutest details of the incident - However, he did not refer to role of two appellants - Also dying declaration made by deceased did not named the above appellants - Two appellants acquitted - Remaining appellant convicted. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 838 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Unnatural death of wife in a room exclusively occupied by deceased and her husband and no explanation offered by husband regarding incident in which deceased sustained burns - No evidence to show circumstantially that accused was present in the room at the time of occurrence - Conviction set aside. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 933 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304 II - Conviction u/s 304 Part II IPC - Appeal against - FIR was lodged within a very short time - - Evidence of eye witnesses found cogent and trustworthy - Medical evidence not at total variance with ocular evidence - Conviction u/s 304 Part II IPC upheld. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 804 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304-B - Soon before - It is a relative term and it would depend upon circumstances of each case and no straitjacket formula can be laid down as to what would constitute a period of soon before the occurrence. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 936 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304-B - Soon before - There must be existence of a proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the death concerned - If the alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has become stale enough not to disturb the mental equilibrium of the woman concerned, it would be of no consequence. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 936 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304-B - To attract applicability of S.304-B IPC the essential ingredients are : (i) The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under a normal circumstance; (ii) Such a death should have occurred within seven years of her marriage; (iii) She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband; (iv) Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with demand of dowry; (v) Such cruelty or harassment is shown to have been meted out to the woman soon before her death. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 936 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.304-B, 34 - Sudden altercation - One accused gave stab blow on abdomen of deceased while three others caught hold different parts of body of deceased - All accused convicted u/s 304 Part II with aid of S.34 IPC - Conviction of accused who gave stab blows upheld - Evidence against three accused not very specific, hence, acquitted. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 898 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.306 - Abetment of suicide - There must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide - Mere fact that husband treated the wife with cruelty is not enough. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 707 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.307, 326, 34 - Offence u/s 307 IPC - High Court reduced sentence from 10 years to 7 years without giving reasons - Injuries inflicted serious in nature - Sentence of accused to whom serious injuries attributed enhanced from 7 years to 10 years. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 891 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.354 - A victim of molestation and indignation is in the same position as an injured witness and her testimony should receive the same weight. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 816 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.354 - Essential ingredients to constitute offence u/s 354 IPC are : (i) that the person assaulted must be a woman; (ii) that the accused must have used criminal force on her; and (iii) that the criminal force must have been used on the woman intending thereby to outrage her modesty. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 816 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.354 - Offence u/s 354 IPC - In order to constitute the offence u/s 354 IPC mere knowledge that the modesty of a woman is likely to be outraged is sufficient without any deliberate intention of having such outrage alone for its object - There is no abstract conception of modesty that can apply to all cases. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 816 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.376, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Ss.3(1) & 9, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, R.7 - Rape of a scheduled caste woman - Investigation by S.I. of police - Offence under SCST Act can only be investigated by a police officer not below the rank of DSP - Proceedings under SCST Act quashed and proceedings for offence under IPC to proceed. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 918 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.376 - Rape - Conduct of prosecutrix - No explanation by prosecutrix as to why she did not inform anybody in the hotel or while coming from the hotel on next day or on the road about the incident - From conduct of prosecutrix during two days, it can be inferred that it was a clear cut case of consent - Accused acquitted. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 848 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.376(2)(g), 300, 201 - Rape and murder - Wife of co-accused eye witness who revealed incident - High Court discarded her evidence without any discussion - Father of victim, complainant, not an eye witness - Fact that complainant did not indicate in complaint as to what eye witness told him not a ground to discard her evidence - Reasoning of High Court wrong and showed total non application of mind - Acquittal set aside. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 912 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.405, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Ss.3 & 4 - Entrustment - If any article is given by way of dowry, the question of entrustment thereof for or on behalf of the bride would not arise. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 794 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.405 - Criminal breach of trust - Ingredients of the offence are : 1. Entrusting any person with property or with any dominion over property; 2. That person entrusted (a) dishonestly misappropriating or converting to his own use that property; or (b) dishonestly using or disposing of that property or willfully suffering any other person so to do in violation- (i) of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or (ii) of any legal contract made touching the discharge of such trust. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 794 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.415, 405 - Cheating - Breach of contract by non refunding amount of advance - Does not constitute offence of cheating - Similar is the legal position in respect of an offence of criminal breach of trust. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 860 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.415, 420 - Cheating - Failure to keep promise - In absence of a culpable intention at the time of making initial promise being absent, no offence u/s 420 IPC can be said to have been made out. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 794 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.415, 420 - Cheque dishonoured - By itself does not mean that accused had cheated the complainant. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 794 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.415 - Cheating - A pure and simple breach of contract does not constitute an offence of cheating. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 860 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.415 - Cheating - An offence of cheating would be constituted when accused has fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making promise or representation. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 860 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.415 - Cheating - Ingredients of offence are : (i) deception of a person either by making a false or misleading representation or by other action or omission; ((ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing any person to deliver any property; or (iii) To consent that any person shall retain any property and finally intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 794 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.415 - Cheating - To constitute an offence of cheating, complainant is required to show that accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making promise or representation. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 794 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.420 - Ingredients of S.420 IPC are : (i) Deception of any persons; (ii) Fraudulently or dishonestly inducing any person to deliver any property; or (iii) To consent that any person shall retain any property and finally intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 860 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.420, 462, 467, 468 & 471, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Cognizance - Quashing of - Will alleged to be forged and fabricated - Dispute entirely civil in nature - Will registered - Will whether surrounded by suspicious circumstances or not to be determined in testamentary proceedings - Civil Court found it to be a prima facie genuine - Not a fit case where cognizance of offence could have been taken. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 738 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.420, 468, 120-B, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Quashing of complaint proceedings - Complainant purchased a tractor manufactured by appellants - Dealer falsely represented tractor to be 40 HP whereas it was 33 HP capacity - Complaint against both dealer and manufacturer - No allegation against manufacturers - No specific role attributed to them - Complaint proceedings qua appellants set aside. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 949 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.498-A, 304-B - Dowry death - Demand of money for purchase of a house - Torture - Statement of father to that effect - Also statement of brother to the same effect - Prosecution placed on record agreement to sell - There was link of demand of dowry with the aid of agreement - Order of conviction, upheld. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 956 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.498-A, 306, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, S.3 - Abetment to suicide - Conviction by trial Court - Upheld by High Court - Letters whereby alleged demand of dowry was made not signed by appellant and even has not been addressed to anyone - Appellant had purchased valuable silver ornament for the deceased and in the insurance policy deceased was shown to be his nominee - Authenticity of letters not established - Accused himself took deceased to hospital - Appellant acquitted of the charges u/s 306 IPC but conviction u/s 498-A IPC and S.3 Dowry Prohibition Act maintained. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 707 (S.C.)

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A - Cruelty - Living with another woman - Not a cruelty within meaning of S.498-A IPC. (S.C.) 674

 Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A - Relative - Girl friend or concubine - Not a relative within meaning of S.498-A IPC. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 674 (S.C.)

Injured eye witnesses

 Injured eye witnesses - When evidence of two injured eye witnesses is consistent and further corroborated by medical evidence, they cannot be disbelieved. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 843 (S.C.)

Injury and post mortem report

 Injury and post mortem report - Non examination of doctor - If its genuineness is not disputed by the opposite party, the said post-mortem report can be read as substantive evidence to prove the correctness of its contents without the doctor concerned being examined. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 843 (S.C.)

Interested witness

 Interested witness - When evidence of interested witnesses is corroborated by medical evidence, then the entire evidence of the interested witnesses ought not be rejected on that ground. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 914 (S.C.)

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000

 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - Juvenile - Plea taken for the first time in Supreme Court - Held, that this plea cannot be taken at this stage as question of age of appellants is a question of fact on which evidence, cross examination is required - If plea of Juvenility is not raised before trial Court or High Court and is raised for the first time in Supreme Court, Judicial conscience of the Court must be satisfied by placing satisfactory material which can show that accused had not attained 18 years of age on the date of commission of offence - School leaving certificate of appellants does not inspire any confidence as the same was issued after accused were convicted - Entry form of birth register not produced - Supreme Court refused to call a report from trial Court on the point as to whether appellants were Juvenile or not on the date of commission of offence - Order of High Court convicting appellants upheld. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 901 (S.C.)

 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, S.16 - "Juvenile" or "child" means a person who has not completed eighteenth year of age. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 878 (S.C.)

 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, S.16 - Juvenile - Determination of age - Date on which offence was committed is the relevant date to determine whether accused was juvenile. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 878 (S.C.)

 Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, S.16 - Determination of age - While calculating a persons age day of his birth must be counted as a whole day and any specified age in law is to be computed as having been attained on the day preceding the anniversary of the birthday - A legal day commences at 12 O'Clock midnight and continues until the same hour the following night. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 878 (S.C.)

Medical

 Medical - Semi digested food - Incident in the month of May - After a period of five hours there can be some semi digested food in the stomach of the deceased. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 843 (S.C.)

Medical and ocular evidence

 Medical and ocular evidence - Statement of injured witness found reliable and trustworthy - His presence at the place of occurrence not doubtful - Opinion of doctor that injury may be self inflicted is not of much significance. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 744 (S.C.)

 Medical and ocular evidence - Unless medical evidence completely rules out all possibilities whatsoever of injuries taking place in the manner alleged by eye witnesses, the testimony of eye witnesses cannot be thrown out on the ground of alleged inconsistency between it and the medical evidence. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 804 (S.C.)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.2(ii)(b) - Ganja - Moisture content not required to be separately ascertained and excluded - Weight of contraband would be the weight taken at the time of seizure. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 841 (S.C.)

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21(a), 21(b) - Mixture of Narcotic drug with one or more neutral substance - Quantity of neutral substance not to be taken into consideration to arrive at a conclusion whether it is small or commercial quantity. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 686 (S.C.)

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.42 - Secret information received about commission of offence under the Act - Has to recorded in writing and communicated to superior officer within a time frame - Mandatory provision not complied with - Vitiates the proceedings. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 806 (S.C.)

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.55 - Sample - Not taken in accordance with S.55 of the Act and standing instruction No.1/88 - Vitiates the proceedings. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 806 (S.C.)

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.67 - Conviction not to be based merely on the basis of statement u/s 67 of the Act without any independent corroboration particularly in view of the fact that such statements have been retracted - Confessional statement of a co-accused could not be used as substantive evidence against the co-accused. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 806 (S.C.)

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.67 - Statement before any authority may bind the maker but not those who had been implicated therein. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 806 (S.C.)

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.67 - Statement made during interrogation - Cannot be construed as confession - Circumstances attendant to making of such statement should be taken into consideration. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 806 (S.C.)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Served upon wife of drawer - Not sufficient - Order of conviction set aside. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 859 (S.C.)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Director - Only such person would be held liable if at the time when offence is committed he was in charge and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company - Merely being a Director of the company in the absence of above factors will not make him liable. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 972 (S.C.)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Director - To launch prosecution against Director of a Company there must be a specific allegation in the complaint as to the part played by him in the transaction - There should be clear and unambiguous allegation as to how the Director is incharge and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company - The description should be clear - Precise words from the provisions of the Act need not be reproduced. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 972 (S.C.)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - In order to bring application of Section 138 the complaint must show: (1) That Cheque was issued; (2) The same was presented; (3) It was dishonored on presentation; (4) A notice in terms of the provisions was served on the person sought to be made liable; (5) Despite service of notice, neither any payment was made nor other obligations, if any, were complied with within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the notice. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 972 (S.C.)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.357(3), 431, Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.64 - Dishonour of cheque - Default in payment of compensation - Default sentence of imprisonment can be imposed for non payment of compensation. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 714 (S.C.)

Order Without Jurisdiction

 Order Without Jurisdiction - An order which is a nullity cannot be brought into effect by invoking the principles of estoppel, waiver or res judicata. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

Police Protection

 Police Protection - Complainant and independent eye witnesses threatened by accused on bail - Police to provide protection if complainant or any witness seeks protection for appearance before Court during trial. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 710 (S.C.)

Related witness

 Related witness - Evidence of a related witness cannot be discarded per se - Relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witness - It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person - Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made - Court has to adopt a careful approach and analyse evidence to find out whether it is cogent and credible. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 838 (S.C.)

 Related witness - Evidence of a related witness cannot be rejected especially when he had no reason to speak falsehood against both the accused - Relative witness would not allow the real culprit to escape and implicate the person who is innocent - However, evidence has to be carefully analysed. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 681 (S.C.)

 Related witness - Merely because the eye witnesses are family members their evidence cannot be per se discarded - When there is allegation of interestedness, the same has to be established. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 920 (S.C.)

 Related witness - Merely because the eye-witnesses are family members their evidence cannot per se be discarded - When there is allegation of interestedness, the same has to be established - Relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witness - It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person - Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made - In such cases, the court has to adopt a careful approach and analyse evidence to find out whether it is cogent and credible. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 951 (S.C.)

Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987

 Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, S.12 - Jurisdiction - Designated Judge has power to determine all questions including the question as regards his own jurisdiction. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

 Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, S.14(5), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.299 - Both the provisions operate in different fields - Their ingredients are different. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

 Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, S.14(5) - Court is required to opine that recording of evidence is urgent - In case neither the accused nor his pleader had an occasion to be before the Court, provision may not be held to have any application - Relevance of the evidence as envisaged u/s 33 of Evidence Act is not taken away by this provision. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 722 (S.C.)

Witness

 Witness - Non naming of one or few of the accused persons in the FIR is no reason to disbelieve the testimony of crucial witnesses. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 712 (S.C.)

 Witness - Testimony - Appreciation - The golden principle is not to weigh such testimony in golden scales but to view it from the cogent standards that lend assurance about its trustfulness. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 762 (S.C.)

Words & Phrases

 Words & Phrases - "Terrorism" - Not defined under TADA nor is it possible to give a precise definition of "terrorism" or lay down what constitutes "terrorism" - It may be possible to describe it as use of violence when its most important result is not merely the physical and mental damage of the victim but the prolonged psychological effect it produces or has the potential of producing on the society as a whole. 2009(3) Criminal Court Cases 829 (S.C.)