Criminal trial – Onus of proving the ingredients of an offence
"5 ..... In our view, the onus of proving all the ingredients of an offence is always upon the prosecution ...
CrPC S. 482 – Quashing – The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is a cryptic, non-reasoned, nonspeaking order – Set aside – After recording the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, and thereafter by passing one paragraph order without assigning any further reasons, the High Court has allowed the application .
CrPC S. 482 – Quashing - The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is a cryptic, non-reasoned, ...
[SC] CrPC S. 156(3) – Power of The Magistrate Under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 156(3) - Power of The Magistrate Under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C - Sakiri ...
CrPC S. 482 – While quashing the criminal proceedings, the High Court has observed that no useful purpose will be served by prolonging the proceedings of the case – The aforesaid cannot be a good ground and/or a ground at all to quash the criminal proceedings when a clear case was made out for the offences alleged.
CrPC S. 482 – While quashing the criminal proceedings, the High Court has observed that no useful purpose will be ...
Satish Kumar Jatav v. The State of U.P , 2022 SCeJ 0599 , 2022 PLRonline 0005 , (2022-2)206 PLR 796 (SC)
LogIn with SupremeCourtOnline subscription
Criminal Trial – Circumstantial evidence – For bringing home the guilt of the accused, prosecution has to firstly prove negligence and then establish direct nexus between negligence of the accused and the death of the victim –
Criminal Trial - Circumstantial evidence – No eye witness - In a case of Circumstantial evidence there is a ...
Nanjundappa v. The State of Karnataka , 2022 SCeJ 0595 , 2022 PLRonline 1605 (SC) ,
Supreme Court of India CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA N.V. RAMANA JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI Nanjundappa v. The State ...
State of Karnataka v. G. Ramanarayana Joshi , 2022 PLRonline 0099 (SC)
LogIn with SupremeCourtonline subscription Karnataka Land Revenue Rules 1966, R. 119(2)
CPC O. 9 R. 13 – Setting aside exparte decree – Observations made by the High Court that defendant cannot be permitted to file their written statement can be said to be beyond the scope and ambit of the CMP filed before the High Court
CPC Order IX Rule 13 – Setting aside exparte decree - Prayer in application to condone the delay as well ...
Sudhir Ranjan Patra (Dead) thr. LRs. v. Himansu Sekhar Srichandan , 2022 SCeJ 0591 , 2022 PLRonline 0205 , (2022-2)206 PLR 795 (SC) (SN)
Supreme Court of India JUSTICE M. R. SHAH JUSTICE B. V. NAGARATHNA Sudhir Ranjan Patra (Dead) thr. LRs. & Anr. ...
Advocate – Duty of – Vakalatnama – Ascertaining identity of the person signing – If he does not personally know the litigant, he must verify the identity of the person signing the Vakalatnama from the documents such as Adhaar or PAN card
Advocate – Duty of – Vakalatnama – Ascertaining identity of the person signing - If the Vakalatnama is executed ...
SURESH CHANDRA v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH, 2022 PLRonline 9605 , 2022 SCeJ 0587
LogIn with SupremeCourtOnline subscription
[SC] FIR – Civil proceeding – Civil proceeding is not a good ground and justification to not register and investigate an FIR if a criminal offence has been committed.
FIR - Civil proceeding - Civil proceeding is not a good ground and justification to not register and investigate an ...
[SC] CrPC S. 482 – High Court could not have directed the registration of an FIR with a direction to the police to investigate and file the final report
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - High Court could not have directed the registration of an FIR with ...
M. SUBRAMANIAM V. S. JANAKI , 2020 PLRonline 6303 (SC) , 2020 SCeJ 352
LogIn with Supreme Court Online subscription Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - High Court could not have directed ...