Legally Aware

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has given a remarkable decision in a criminal appeal (by way of SLP). The appellant-accused has been convicted under S.363 IPC and S.6 read with S.29 of POCSO Act 2012. The prosecution had alleged that the accused had taken a minor girl aged 2.5 years with him to a public park without knowledge of her mother. Upon searching for her, her mother and her uncle reached to the park and took her away from the accused. Later, when they reached to their ‘jhuggi’ the girl went asleep. When she woke up and her mother took her for urine, she saw blood stains on girl’s ‘pyjami’ and reddishness on her vaginal area. The mother took her daughter to a private doctor who asked her to report the incident to the Police. Hence, the accused had been arrested and tried by the Trial Court. The Trial Court relied on testimony of the girl’s mother, the private doctor and the girl’s uncle, and convicted the accused for offence of S.363 IPC with 1 year of rigorous imprisonment and fin...

“….. This Court is not expected to remain a mute spectator where an aspect of evidence bearing directly upon the guilt or innocence of the accused is left unattended. …..” ~ Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Mehta The Hon’ble Supreme Court has given a remarkable decision in criminal appeal case and acquitted the accused-appellant from all the charges of IPC and POCSO Act 2012, in the premise of irregularities in investigation and no corroborative and scientific evidence of forensic nature to prove the alleged sexual assault. The prosecution case completely relied on ocular and testamentary evidence which was erringly affirmed by the Trial Court and the High Court, caused a man to spend 9 years in custody. An FIR was registered against unknown under S.376, 376(2)(i)(j), 363, 323 and S.3/4 POCSO Act 2012 for an alleged offence of sexual assault to a five-year girl. The police arrested the accused-appellant only after 2 months of the incident. It was alleged that the police told the victim ...

The Hon'ble Supreme Court has given remarkable decision holding the longstanding idea that sufferer's earning capacity should be assessed in the open and competitive market only. The facts of the case were as: In a road accident, the claimant had suffered a 100% physical disability by blindness, pelvic fractures, and a permanent loss of large intestine resulting to stoma for her life time. Also, in the same accident, her fiancé had succumbed to death resulting to loss of marriage prospects. She had to go through 19 months of unpaid leave to recover from the injuries. The testimonies and records of various medical professionals established that the Claimant was treated at multiple hospitals, including Anand Hospital (Meerut), Fortis Hospital (Noida), Kailash Hospital, Heart Institute (Noida), and Nitin Hospital (Patiala). Despite an attempt to restore continuity of her large intestine at AIIMS, the procedure failed, leaving her with a permanent stoma for the rest of her life. In...

The Hon'ble Supreme Court has given a remarkable decision in an appeal against an adverse order of the High Court. The facts of the case were: The wife had died due to poisoning and the husband and his family members booked under S.498A and 306 IPC. With due considerations, the Sessions Judge acquitted all of them on ground that the allegations of the victim’s family are vague and general and also, no material evidence has been brought that favour occurrence of the alleged offence. Later the High Court on appeal against acquittal, overturned the acquittal of the husband. Aggrieved by the adverse order, the appellant-husband reached the Supreme Court. The Hon’ble SC held that the High Court has erred in overturning the decision of the acquittal. While considering an appeal against acquittal, the principles laid down in Sheo Swarup and Ors v. The King Emperor, AIR 1934 PC 227(2) , which were approved by this Court in Bhubneshwar Mandal & Ors. V. The State of Bihar (CRL A No. 257 ...

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Asfaq v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (2017 INSC 884) elaborately defined parole and furlough, types of parole based on the State Guidelines, and set out a number of differences between parole and furlough. Through this judgement, the Court also set out the guidelines on what conditions the applications for parole be decided. The Court through this judgment expressly held that mere heinous and aggravated nature of offence alone can not be the ground for rejection of an application for parole. The reformative theory of criminology mandates that all individuals irrespective of the nature of their crimes and conviction should be given a chance to maintain their social and family ties and re-establish their relationship in the society. Also, such legal remedies reduce the growth tendency of recidivism in the convicted person after being released. Parole: A parole can be defined as conditional release of prisoners i.e. an early release of a prisoner, condition...

The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala gave a remarkable decision in a criminal miscellaneous petition filed under section S.528 BNSS (S.482 CrPC) to quash an FIR. The accused-petitioner, a Muslim-husband, had been booked under S.366 and S.376(2)(n) of IPC, Sec 6(1) r/w S.5(1) & S.15(1) of POCSO Act 2012. The petitioner’s counsel urged that the de facto complainant is legally wedded wife of accused-petitioner. Their marriage took based on Islamic religious rights when she was 17 years and 1 month old. Such marriage has been admitted by the de facto complainant, the brother of the de facto complainant and the Kazi of the Mosque where the marriage was solemnized. Hence, Exception 2 to S.375 IPC is applicable to the petitioner and this case shall be quashed. Whereas, the complainant’s counsel argued that S.2(1)(d) of the POCSO Act 2012 declares that child means a person below eighteen years of age. Also, S.6 of the said Act provides for aggravated penetrative sexual assault as the accused...