1. Dr. S.K. Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., Crl Appeal No. 416/2018
    • There is no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in cases under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 if no prima facie case is made out or where on judicial scrutiny the complaint is found to be prima facie mala fide.
  2. Kartic v. State 1996 CrLJ 889- Conviction on the basis of solitary witness
    • The court can convict the accused person on the basis of solitary witness provided his credibility is not shaken by any adverse circumstances and the court, at the same time, is convinced that he is a truthful witness.
  3. Exercise of Art 136 to interfere with orders granting bail [ State of Maharashtra v. Captain Buddhikota Subba Rao, AIR 1989 SC 2292]
    • It is true that the Supreme Court does not interfere with an order granting bail but judicial discipline will be sacrificed at the altar of judicial discretion if jurisdiction under Art. 136 is refused to be exercised.
  4. Once an accused is granted pardon under Sec. 306 of CrPC he ceases to be an accused and becomes a witness for the prosecution. [ State (Delhi Admin.) v Jagjit Singh, AIR 1989 SC 989]
  5. Object of Sec 313 of CrPC: To establish a direct dialogue between the court and the accused.
    • If a point in the evidence is important against the accused, and the conviction is intended to be based upon it, it is right and proper that the accused should be questioned about the matter and be given an opportunity of explaining it. [ Asraf Ali v. State of Assam, (2008) 16 SCC 328]
  6. Life Imprisonment
    • The sentence of life imprisonment means imprisonment for the rest of life or the remainder of the life of the convict. Such convict can always apply for obtaining remission either under Article 72 or Article 161 of the Constitution or under Section 432 of CrPC. [UOI v. V Sriharan @ Mururgan, W.P.(Crl) 48/2014]
  7. Admissibility of entries recorded in birth register. [Harpal Singh v. State of H.P., AIR 1981 SC 361]
    • The entry in the birth register recorded by the public authority shall be admissible under Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The examination of person making such entry is not necessary.
  8. Criminal Conspiracy [ State of H.P. v. Krishan Lal, AIR 1987 SC 773]
    • If pursuant to the criminal conspiracy the conspirators commit several offences, then all of them will be liable for the offences even if some of them had not actively participated in the commission of the offences.
  9. Determining Factors to ascertain the intention of murder. [ State of Rajasthan v. Dhol Singh, AIR 2004 SC 1264]
    • The number of injuries is irrelevant. It is not always the determining factor in ascertaining the intention. It is the nature of injury, the part of body where it is caused, the weapon used in causing such injury which are the indicators of the fact whether the respondent caused the death of the deceased with an intention of causing death or not.

Disclaimer: Although we try to ensure that the information provided, whether in relation to the products, services, or offering or otherwise provided (hereinafter mentioned as “INFORMATION”) on the website is correct at the time of publishing, we or any third parties do not provide any warranty or guarantee as to the accuracy, timeliness, performance, completeness or suitability of the information and materials found or offered on this website for any particular purpose. It shall be your own responsibility to ensure that any products, services or information available through this website meet your specific requirements. Neither the website nor any person/organization acting on its behalf may accept any legal liability/responsibility.

Terms-and-conditions/ (Click Here)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s