Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
‘Reputation is an essential attribute of personality, and the violation of this right is actionable both as a tort as well as a crime.’
The petition was requested to be treated as a representation since the Government is in the process of receiving inputs on the new criminal laws from various stakeholders.
“For cheating, criminal intention is necessary at the time of making a false or misleading representation i.e., since inception. In criminal breach of trust, mere proof of entrustment is sufficient. Thus, in case of criminal breach of trust, the offender is lawfully entrusted with the property, and he dishonestly misappropriated the same. Whereas, in cheating, the offender fraudulently or dishonestly induces a person by deceiving him to deliver any property.”
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment, on related eyewitness, dating back to the year 1953.
To constitute an offence under Section 306 of the Penal Code, there should be instances of abetment under Section 107.
The word ‘he’ in Section 3 of the POCSO Act could not be given a restrictive meaning to say that it referred only to a ‘male’.
“The promise of marriage must have been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given”- Supreme Court in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 9 SCC 608
“Now-a-days people have become more sensitive about their religions may be than before and everybody wants to impress as to how his religion/God is supreme. Everybody should respect the religion, caste, creed etc. of another. But at the same time, if the person says that his religion is supreme, then the other person may not immediately react. There are ways and means to react on such sensitive issues.”
The SIM card purchased by the co-accused after the alleged murder was used to misguide the investigation of the case and the family members of the deceased girl.
The complainant was adult enough to know that the law forbids a second marriage and there was no allegation in the complaint that applicant promised to divorce his first wife and then marry her.
The instant FIR was nothing, but a shot fired by the husband from his wife’s shoulders to espouse his own interest in the father’s property.
It was said that since all sub-sections of Section 354A of IPC start with the words ‘a man’, a female accused would not be covered under this Section.
This was a case where the act of defamation took place in Jaipur, where certain allegations regarding the respondent’s association with Hizbul Mujahiddin were levelled by the counsel for the petitioner.
The Court noted that Section 90 of IPC does not define the term “consent”, but the law does not see “consent derived from a fear of injury and misconception of fact” as consent.
The Court stated that the accused had not only cheated the public at large but also attempted to disrespect the noble legal profession.
No other specific overt act is attributed to petitioners to attract the offences punishable under Sections 294, 114 read with Section 34 of Penal Code, 1860 against them.
The Court opined that since the petition was filed after 01-07-2024, it ought to have been filed under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
The Court referred to Jolly George Varghese v. Bank of Cochin, (1980) 2 SCC 360 quoting Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer that “to be poor, in this land of Daridranayan, is no crime, and to recover debts by the procedure of putting one in prison is too flagrantly violative of Article 21 unless there is proof of the minimal fairness of his wilful failure to pay in spite of his sufficient means”.
The Court opined that the applicant has a bright future and is apprehensive of the stigma of conviction that may ruin his future, therefore, it was expedient to release him on probation under the Section 4 benefit
“The Parliament, after considering a spate of reports highlighting the flourishing human organ trade in India and the consequential exploitation of the economically vulnerable segments of the society through organ removal, and illegal transplants, for prohibiting the unethical practice, enacted the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994”