The Vohra Law Office Blog
Expert commentary on Indian law, case analysis, and legal guides
Common Object Of Unlawful Assembly To Commit Murder Established By Ocular And Medical Evidence : Supreme Court
The appellants challenged their conviction for murder and other offences arising from a mass violence incident in 1983 where five persons were killed and several injured when a mob set fire to a house. The Supreme Court dismissed their appeals, upholding the findings that the accused constituted an unlawful assembly with common object to commit murder, and each member was vicariously liable under Section 149 IPC.
High Court Retains Plenary Powers To Direct Criminal Investigation When Estate Is In Custodia Legis : Supreme Court
A charitable trust challenged a High Court order directing a court-monitored criminal investigation into alleged siphoning of a deceased Parsi testator's estate worth over Rs. 100 Crores. The Supreme Court upheld the investigation, holding that a High Court exercising testamentary jurisdiction does not lose its constitutional plenary powers under Article 215 to protect estate funds and prevent abuse of its process.
Mere Denial In Section 313 Statement Combined With Medical Evidence Of Homicidal Hanging Suffices For Section 302 Conviction : Supreme Court
The father of Soma Acharjee filed a complaint alleging his daughter was tortured for dowry by her husband and in-laws and later found hanging at her matrimonial home. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the murder conviction, holding that when medical evidence establishes homicidal hanging with ante-mortem injuries inconsistent with suicide and the accused offers no plausible explanation under Section 313 CrPC, conviction under Section 302 IPC is sustainable.
Burden Of Proving Fraud Rests Upon Party Alleging Misuse Of Fiduciary Authority Under GPA : Supreme Court
Mallika filed a civil suit seeking declaration that sale deeds executed by respondents using her General Powers of Attorney were null and void, claiming the GPAs were only security for loans. The Supreme Court dismissed her appeal, holding that the burden of proving fraud and fiduciary misuse rested upon her and she failed to establish the loan transactions or repayment despite serious allegations.
High Court Cannot Grant Bail Without Considering Material Evidence And Settled Principles : Supreme Court
Bhagat Singh, nephew of murder victim Bharat Singh, challenged High Court's order granting bail to accused Kunwarpal Singh. The Supreme Court set aside the bail order finding it cryptic and without proper consideration of material evidence including the FIR naming the accused, post-mortem report, and recovery of murder weapon.
Last Seen Together Theory Fails When Time Gap Is Large And Other circumstances Fail To Form Complete Chain : Supreme Court
The son of the complainant went missing on the evening of 30.10.2012 and was found dead the next day. The police rounded up three of his companions as accused. The trial court convicted all three based on last seen together theory, extra-judicial confession and recoveries. The Supreme Court acquitted two of the accused finding the circumstantial evidence insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Threat To Upload Private Video On Social Media Constitutes Criminal Intimidation By Imputing Unchastity : Supreme Court
The appellant was convicted for criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC for threatening to upload a private video of the prosecutrix on Facebook. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, holding that threatening to publish intimate footage amounts to imputing unchastity under the evolved interpretation of the term in modern context.
Intention To Commit Murder Must Be Independently Proved For Conviction Under Section 307 IPC : Supreme Court
Three accused persons challenged their conviction under Section 307 IPC for assaulting a night watchman. The Supreme Court held that while grievous injuries were caused, the prosecution failed to establish the requisite intention or knowledge to commit murder, altering the conviction to Section 325 IPC.
Bail Cancelled When High Court Failed To Consider Supreme Court's Earlier Order And Accused's Absconding Conduct : Supreme Court
The brother of a murder victim challenged the High Court's order granting bail to Respondent No. 2, who was accused of firing at the victim and his family members with a country-made pistol to coerce them into withdrawing the murder case. The Supreme Court set aside the bail order finding the High Court failed to consider the Supreme Court's earlier cancellation of bail, the accused's absconding conduct, and material evidence including CCTV footage showing the accused firing multiple rounds.
Mere Exclusion Of Natural Heirs From Will Does Not By Itself Constitute Suspicious Circumstance : Supreme Court
The wife and children of a deceased testator challenged the validity of a Will bequeathing ancestral properties to his sister, claiming it was fabricated. The Supreme Court dismissed their appeal, holding that mere exclusion of natural heirs from a Will does not by itself constitute a suspicious circumstance sufficient to invalidate it.
Visitor's Disciplinary Authority Over First Registrar Appointed Under Section 46(b) Of RGNAU Act Is Valid : Supreme Court
The First Registrar of Rajiv Gandhi National Aviation University challenged his termination of service ordered by the Visitor. The High Court held that the Visitor and Ministry of Civil Aviation had no jurisdiction to take disciplinary action. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that the Visitor being the appointing authority under Section 46(b) had power to terminate services, but declined to interfere with the High Court's operative directions due to peculiar circumstances.
Statutory Right To Additional Amenity TDR Cannot Be Waived By Contractual Undertaking : Supreme Court
The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation challenged a High Court order directing it to grant additional amenity TDR to a landowner for developing a garden on land surrendered under the MRTP Act. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that statutory compensation rights under Section 126(1)(b) of the MRTP Act cannot be waived by contractual undertakings and that delay or laches cannot defeat claims for fair statutory compensation.