Judge bashing

 

Case

1. Haridas Das Vs Usha Rani banik & Ors (2007) 14 SCC 1
1. Judge bashing is not and cannot be a substitue for constructive criticism
2. In Re: S. Mulgoakar (1978) 3 SCC 339
1. Lowering respect of judiciary and destroy public confidence cannot be ignored.

Remove content from Internet

 

Intermediaries 

1. Block the content which are abusive and offensive 

EWS - Economically Weaker Sections

 

EWS 

1. Quantum of Reservation ( Source : link )
1. EWS who are NOT covered under scheme of reservation of SCs, STs & OBC
2. Shall get 10% reservation in direct recruitment
3. in civil posts and services in the GoI
2. Exemption from Reservation 
1. Scientific and Technical posts
1. Posts above Group A
2. Should be classified as scientific or techincal by Cabinet secretrait
3. Criteria of Income & Assets
1. Whose family has GROSS ANNUAL INCOME below 8 Lakh are to be identified as EWS for benefit of reservation.
2. Annual income shall include from all sources 
1. Salary, agriculture, business, profession etc for the financial year prior to year of application. 
3. Person whose family own / possesses following are are excluded
1. 5+ acre of agricultural land 
2. Residential flat of 1000sq ft and above
3. Residential plot of 100sq yards and above in notified municipalities
4. Residential plot of 200 sq yards and above in other than notified municipalities
5. Property held by family in different location / different places would be clubbed while applying the land or property holding test to determining EWS status.
4. Family - parents, siblings below < 18y and also spouse and chldren age < 18y
4. Income and Asset certificate issuing authority
1. DM/ ADM/ Collector/ Deputy Commissioner/ Tahsildar
5. Appointing authorities
1. appointment is provisional and subject to income and asset certifacte being verified through proper channel 
2. if verification reveals claim to belong EWS is fake/false the service will be terminated forthwith without assigning any further reasons and without prejuice to such further action 
6. EWS is a policy matter, courts are entitled to know the reasons adopted for arriving at a policy decision to determine its constitutionality. 
7. Concerned Ministry : Ministry of social welfare and Department of personnel and training. 
8. Sinho commission report 
9. As per A 15(6) and 16(6) the state Govt notify the criteria for EWS
10. 103rd Constitution amendment - u/s A15 & 16 says that economically weaker sections - Shall be such as may be notified by the state from time to time on basis of family income and other indicators of economic disadvantages. 

Courts

1. EWS - criteria of annual income of Rs 8L for determining the eligibility for economic weaker sections. in NEET all India Quota
1. WP (Civil) 961/ 2021
2. 8L criteria is for creamy layer for OBC, how the same criteria can be adopted for OBC and EWS categories, where latter has no social and educational backwardness.
3. what is the demographic or sociological or socio-economic data
4. making unequals equal by applying the Rs8L limit

Case 

1. Neli Aurelio Nunes Vs UoI
2.  Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India & Ors.
3. M.R. Balaji & Ors. v. State of Mysore  (1963) Supp. 1 SCR 439
1. 50% ceiling on reservation was first laid in here
4. Indra Sawhney
1. approvied 50% ceiling on reservation
5.  M. Nagaraj & Ors. V. Union of India & Ors
6. f I.R. Coelho (Dead) by LRs. v. State of Tamil Nadu
7.  Jarnail Singh & Ors. v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta & Ors
8. Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India & Anr

Notification

1. 103rd Constitution amendment - 12th January 2019 
2. No 36039/1/2019 - 31st January 2019 - Estt (res) - Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions - department of Personnel & Training - Reservation of EWS in direct recruitment in civil post and services in the GoI - link

Questions

1. OBC - creamy layer - economic criteria - 8L 

Temple lands

 

Issues

1. Encroachment of land belonging to Temple 
2. Leasing out of temple lands

Resolution

1. Land belonging to temples are preserved 
2. encroached land should be recovered.

Bhaktavatsala Perumal Temple ( Tirukannamagi in Tiruvarur )

1. WP No 15911 of 2021 - Madras High Court.
2. 400 acres of land encroached
3. Law refereed : Hindu Religious and charitable Endowments Act 1959 - link
4. Important points
1. Why not contempt to be filed against such a person inter alia, for the disrespect shown to the court in the manner in which affidavit had been drafted and for dereliction of duty in not paying attention to any detail .
2. Leasing out temple lands to any tenant and what part of temple land has been let out and what part encroached.

Endangered Communities

 

Endangered Communities

1. Karbong - Tripura

Legal Provision

1. Karbong 
1. Tripura HC - suo motu cognizance of a news report highlighting the plight of karbong  community - on verge of extinction on account of poor socio-economic conditions
1. Directed - Advocate general of state as well as assistant solicitor general of UoI - to make assessment of area and needs of the community - report by 9th of November 2021
2. ONGC - CSR  initiative activities in Karbong community - file affidavit
2. History & Details
1. Sub-tribe of Halam community in Tripura, once guest of rulers of erstwhile kingdom
1. Sub tribe inspite of having a language distinctly different from all other tribes - Indian census does not count them separately.
2. UNESCO classification of languages - language spoken less than 10k people is considered potentially endangered.
2. 250 - odd people - West Tripura and dhalai district
3. Harihar Debnath - an expert on the sub-tribe
4. Autonomous district council -1989 - started primary school which started to function in 1993
5. Population is reduced - inter tribal marriage, poverty & lack of proper education.
6. They profess - Hinduism

UPSC

 

Case Law

1. Prakash Singh Vs Union of India
1. UPSC should, as far as possible, consider only those officers for such appointment who have two years of service left

Compensation

 

Examples

1. Women was mercilessly subjected to violent sexual abuse.

NDPS - Narcotics Drug Psychotropic Substance

 

Objective 

1. 
   

Challenges

1. Innovative methods used for Traffickers 

Techniques of transportation of Drugs

1. Droplet on the paper and once absorbed, it became one with the paper fibres
2. it was consumed as a whole with the carrier agent. 

Bail 

1. Bail rejected 
1. accused possessing commercial quantity of Drug - acted as catalyst to spoil the younger generation ( kerry Mendes Vs Union of India )
2. Arguments against Bail
1. Traffickers have least regard to health & life of person
2. Only with a view to their betterment 
3. Narcotic drug - root cause of many evils that are perpetrated by person under influence 
4. Impact over generations
5. Stringent measures to deal with trafficking of such substances and stringent punishment are also envisaged for any infraction.
6. Age of accused is immaterial when involved in patent from the record of serious offences.
7. Every possibility of misusing the liberty, pressurising the prosecution witness and absconding by frustrating objective of trail

Questions 

1. what is Commercial Quantity?
1. Rigors of Section 37 of NDPS apply 

CRED

 

CRED 

1. Founder : Kunal Shah 
2. Spoof on CRED

Features

1. Simple and clean way of consolidating all credit card bills
1. UPI based - few click payment
2. CRED Points
1. 1point for 1Re - cred card payment
3. CRED Loans - 14.5% ( 1.2 % per month ) 
4. CRED mint - park your liquid money and get 9% ( best effort ) powered by P2P lending 
1. Criticism
1. It looks like MLM ( Multi level Marketing ) 
2. Cheap Chit fund
2. Alternative P2P lending platforms
1. Lenden Club
5. Access to 2 Credit bureaus - 
1. Experian
2. Crif Score
6. CRED
1. Payment of monthly RENT
2. Education Loan

UTILITY

1. Not good ROI - your data ( Payment, purchase, type of cards, credit limits, Credit scores ) for simple, clean, reminding UI - Coins are crumbs on the table for successfully mining of financial data.
1. Alternatives 
1. Having standing instruction in the Bank account
2. Some bank accounts also provide points
3. Some apps like Amazon, Paytm provide payment and reminder options

Important

1. CRED knows your spending patterns
2. It gives some discounts 
3. Common issues
1. Accumulated CRED points accumulated 
1. use the to get CASH Back 
2. pay for O2 during Covid Crisis
3. Buy Raffel tickets - for Iphone or something like that
4. Not great offers till now 
5. Initially Swiggy , Zomato offers
2. 
   
4. DEACTIVATE CRED Account
1. in app customer support - deactivate 

Rules

1. Rule of Tender age 
1. Section 6 of HAMA 1956 - father is first natural guardian followed by mother, in case child below 5y, the custody shall ordinarily with mother
2. Rule of Lenity
1. Ambiguity must be decided in favour of the accused. - Principle of statutory construction 

CPC - Order IX Rule 13

 

Important Points

1. Defendant refused to accept summons issued in the suit.
2. After the suit was decreed ex-parte, execution proceedings were initiated.
3. Sub-Rule (5) of Order V Rule 9 of CPC - states inter alia that if defendant or his agent had refused to take delivery of the postal article containing the summons, the court issuing the summons shall declare that the summons had been duly served on the defendant.
4. Section 27 of General Clauses Act, 1897 gives rise to a presumption that service of notice has been effected when it is sent to the correct address by registered post.

Case Law

1. Alavi Haji Vs palapetty Muhammed AIR 2007 SC (Supp) 1705
1. if notice is sent by registered post and is returned with a postal endorsement "refused" or "not available in the house" or "house locked" or "shop closed" or "addressee not in-station" due service has to be presumed.
2. Jagdish Singh Vs natthu Singh 
3. state of MP Vs Hiralal
4. V Raja Kumari vs P.Subbaram Naidu

Upper Age limit - Appointment to Public Post

 

Important Points

1. SC has held that provision relating to upper age limit should be construed as mandatory and not directory.
1. Making them directory would mean that the authority is given unbridled power in giving relaxations to person of their choice.
2. That is impermissible as per the constitutional scheme, as the appointment to the public post must be accordance with A14 and A16
3. there should not be scope of arbitrary selection by unfettered discretion being vested in the authorities.
2. Eligibility criteria should be uniform and there cannot be scope of arbitrary selection by unfettered discretion vested with authorities.

Article 142 of Constitution of India

 

Statue

Important Points

1. Plenary Jurisdiction of SC to impart complete justice under A142 
2. A142 cannot ipso facto be limited or restricted by ordinary statutory provisions
3. In absence of an express provision akin to section 482 CrPc conferring powers on SC to abrogate and set aside criminal proceedings, the jurisdiction exercisable u/s A142 of constitution embraces this court with Scorpius power to quash criminal proceedings also, so as to secure complete justice.
4. Overarching objective of sentencing in the criminal justice system
1. sublime philosophy of maintenance of peace of the collective and that the rationale of placing individual behind bars is aimed at his reformation.
5. Powers u/s 142 which have wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in context of quashing criminal proceedings
1. Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society
2. seriousness of the injury, if any
3. Voluntary nature of compromise b/w the accused and the victim
4. Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the puported offence and/or other relevant consideration.

Party In Person

 

Statue

1. Advocates Act
1. Section 30 - Right of advocate to practise  - Subject to the provisions of this Act, every advocate whose name is entered in the 3[ State roll ] shall. be entitled as right to practise throughout the territories to which the act extends
1. in all courts including the Supreme Court
2. before any tribunal or person legally authorised to take evidence
3. before any other authority or person before whom such advocate is by or under any law for the time being in force entitled to practise.
2. Section 33 - Advocates alone entitled to practise, NO person can be said to be entitled to practise in any court, unless he is enrolled as an advocate under this act.
3. Section 32 - Power of court to permit appearances in particular cases, discretionary power to permit, or not permit such a person who is NOT enrolled as an Advocate to appear before it.
2. Uttarakhand Party in Person Rules 2020
1. Bestows discretionary power on the court to permit or not to permit a party to appear in person and to argue his or her case.

Important Points

1. Discretion vested by Advocates Act on court to permit or not to permit a party to appear in person and to argue the case.
2. It is NOT the RIGHT of a person other than an enrolled advocate to appear and argue before the court. 

Arguments for Party In Person

1. No faith in any of the counsel of HC and would not like any counsel to be appointed by Court 
2. his advocates are draged into needless controversies by those in power
3. Knowledge of law, his erudite arguments his critical analysis of the law and facts have been lauded by a few legal fora.

Case Laws

1. Goa Antibiotics and Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vs R.K Chawala & 9 (2011) 15 SCC 449
1. It is not the right of a person, other than an enrolled advocate, to appear and argue before the court, but it is a discretion vested by the Act on the Court to permit or not to permit a party to appear in person and to argue the case.

Attempt to Murder - 307 IPC

 

Statue

1. 307 IPC - Attempt to murder
2. 34 IPC - common Intention

Important points

1. Attempt to murder 307 IPC will fall under category of heinous offence, and has to be treated as a crime against the society and not against the individual alone
2. Proceeding u/s 307 IPC cannot be quashed only on ground that the parties have resolved the entire disputes amongst themselves.
3. Quash
1. HC u/s 482 CrPC could be exercised keeping in mind the injuries sustained
2. Injury was inflicted on a vital part of the body, nature of weapons used.
4. Criminal Justice system has a larger objective to achieve, that is safety and protection of people at large and it would be a lesson not only to offender but to the individuals at large so that such crimes would not be committed by any one and money would not be a substitute for the crime committed against the society.
5. The guiding factors is as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power, both 
1. the ultimate consequences may be a acquittal or 
2. dismissal of indictment

Arguments used for Quash - 482 CrPC

1. Attacked only by kitchen knife
2. Entered into compromise 
3. money already paid
4. Distantly related
5. To ensure both sides lived peacefully 

Case Law

1. State of Rajasthan vs Shambhu Kewat (2014) 4 SCC 149
1. 307 IPC is serious offence and ordinarily should not be quashed by HC while exercising its power under section 482 CrPC on the ground that parties have settled their dispute
2. Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466
1. SC quashed 307 IPC after noticing judgment in Kewat 
2. matter was referred to larger bench
3. court may be justified on its own facts, at the same time this court ows an explanation as why two different approaches are adopted in various cases
3. State of MP Vs Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688  - issue was resolved
1. 307 IPC - heinous offence
2. Treated as crime against society and not against individual alone 

Discharge Burden u/s 106 IEA

 

Statue

1. Section 101 of IEA
1. Whoever desires any court to give a judgment as to a liability dependent on the existence of facts, he MUST prove those facts exist.
2. 106 Indian Evidence Act
1. Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge - when any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him.
3. 
   

Important Points

1. Failure to discharge burden under section 106 of IEA 1872, is NOT RELEVANT in a case governed by circumstantial evidence, IF prosecution is unable to establish a chain of circumstances.
2. Circumstantial Evidence - the prosecution has to establish chain of circumstances
1. When chain is not complete, the falsity of the defense is NO GOUND to convict the accused.
3. Application of 106 IEA
1. Applies to those cases where the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the facts 
2. FROM which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding the existence of certain other facts which are within the special knowledge of the accused.
3. When accused FAILS to offer proper explanation about the existence of said other facts, 
4. Court can always draw an appropriate inference.
4. Section 106 constitutes an EXCEPTION to section 101.
5. Section 106 is NOT INTENDED to relieve prosecution relieve it of that duty of burden of Proof.
1. On the contrary, it is designed to meet certain exceptional cases in which it would be impossible or at any rate dispoportionately difficult for the prosecution to establish facts which are especially within knowledge of the accused and which he could prove without difficulty or inconvenience. 

Case Laws

1. Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs State of Maharastra (1984) 4 SCC 116
1. Para 153 - Panchsheel - 5 Golden Principles
1. A close analysis of this decision would show that the following conditions must be fulfilled before a case against an accused can be said to be fully established
1. The circumstances from which the conclusion of the guilt is to be drawn should be FULLY established.
2. The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say they SHOULD NOT be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty.
3. The circumstances SHOULD be of a conclusive nature and tendency
4. They should EXCLUDE every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved
5. there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by accused.
2. Shambu Nath Mehra Vs The State of Ajmer 
1. Section 106 is an exception to Section 101. Section 101 lays down the general rule about the burden of proof. 
1. Illustrations (a)
1. A desires a court to give Judgment that B shall be punished for a crime which A says B has committed
2. A must prove that B has committed the crime

Life Imprisonment

 

Summary

1. Imprisonment for life is equivalent to Rigorous Imprisonment for life

Case Law 

1. Niab Singh Vs State of Punjab, (1983) 2 SCC 454
1. Imprisonment for life is Rigorous Imprisonment for life
2. In view of the authoritative pronouncements made by Privay Council and this Court in Kishori Lal vs Emperor, AIR 1945 PC 64: 72 IA 1, Gopal Vinayak Godse vs State of Maharastra, AIR 1961 SC 600
2. Gopal Vinayak Godse vs State of Maharastra, AIR 1961 SC 600
3. Kishori Las Vs Emperor, 1961 3 SCR 440

Questions

1. what is Rigorous Imprisonment?

LRS - Land Regularization Scheme

 

The full form of LRS is Layout Regularisation Scheme. Under this scheme, all illegal layouts or plots registered under municipal area can be regularized in Telangana. However, this regularisation is only for plots or layouts which are sold via sale deed prior March 3, 2018. By unapproved layout or plot, I mean properties who dont have permissions from the respective authorities such as HMDA, GHMC and DTCP.

Documents that are required for LRS in Telangana are:
1] Sale deed
2] Occupancy certificate
3] Building approval plan
4] Khata number
5] Conversion certificate
6] Commencement certificate

Whats the latest update:

Of late, the state government has rolled out the latest guidelines for LRS scheme towards legalising of open plots in unapproved layouts. All unauthorized layouts/plots which are registered through sale deed before August 26, 2020, are eligible for the regularisation after paying the penalty. The last date for filing applications to get LRS is October 15. The government has decided to collect Rs 1,000 from individual applicants and Rs 10,000 from developers as a registration fee. According to the new guidelines, if the owners fail to regularise their plots, then they wont get building permits and wont be able to register their property. The new policies are applicable in HMDA and other urban development authorities, municipal corporations and panchayats.

Concern over inflated LRSprices:

Many buyers or owners have claimed that the government is charging an exorbitant amount for registering the plot. Experts believe that inflated prices are expected to impact the lower-income and middle-class families. Apart from the registration fee, the applicants will have to pay basic regularisation charges to obtain LRS clearance such as:

1] Rs. 200 per square metre for plot area of less than 100 square
2] Rs 400 for area of 101 to 300 square metre
3] Rs 600 for area of 301 to 500 square metre
4] Rs 750 for area above 500 square metre

Marital rape

 

Statue

1. 375 IPC, 1860 - Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 15y of age is not rape. 
2. Common Law Origin - Sir Mathew Hale CJ in History of Please of the Crown
1. the husband cannot be guilty of a rape committed by himself upon his lawful wife, for by their mutual matrimonial consent and contract the wife hath given herself up in this kind unto her husband which she cannot rectract.

Important Points

1. 375(2) IPC sexual intercourse b/w man and wife being a girl b/w 15-18 of age is rape?
1. Exception carved out in IPC creates an unnecessary and artificial distinction b/w married girl child and unmarried girl child and has not rational nexus with any unclear objective sought to be achieved.
2. Independent Thought Vs Union of India WP 382 2013 - J Madan B Lokur
2. 172 Report on review of Rape laws - the Law commission 
1. Increase marriage age from 15 to 16y for girls
2. the idea of remove 375(2) IPC was not accepted
3. 2013 - Report of Committee on Amendment to Criminal Law by Justice J.S Verma
1. Recommended removal of 375(2) IPC
1. Marital or other relationship b/w the perpetrator or victim is not a valid defence against the crimes of rape or sexual violation
2. relationship b/w accused and the complainant is not relevant to the inquiry into whether the complainant consented to the sexual activity.
3. fact that the accused and victim are married or in another intimate relationship may not be regarded as mitigating factor justifying lower sentence for rape
4. Report pointed out that the exemption for marital rape stems from a long out dated notion of marriage which regarded wives as no more than the property of her husbands
4. 2018 - Nimeshbhai bharatbhai Desai Vs State of Gujarat
1. Marital rape is serious matter though, unfortunately it is not attracting serious discussion at the end
2. A women is no longer the chattel-antiquated pracices labeled her to be. A husband who has sexual intercourse with his wife is not merely using a property , he is fulfilling a marital consortium with a fellow human being with dignity equal to that he accords himself. He cannot be permitted to violate this dignity by coercing her to engage in a sexual act without her full and free consent
5. Decriminalizing adultery
1. Lord Keith in R vs R - marriage is in modern times regarded as a partnership of equals and no longer one in which the wife must be subservient chattel of the husband.
6. Privacy Judgment 
1. Privacy also connotes a right to be left alone, it safeguards individual autonomy and recognizes the ability of the individual to control vital aspects of his / her life
2. Privacy protects heterogeneity and recognizes the plurality and diversity of our culture. 
3. while legitimate expectation of privacy may vary from the intimate zone to the private zone and from private to public arenas, it is most important to underscore that privacy is not lost or surrendered merely because the individual is in a public place.
4. Privacy attaches to the person since it is an essential facet of dignity of the human being.
7. State of Maharashtra Vs Madhukar Narayan Mardikar AIR 1991 SC 207
1. Even a woman of easy virtue is entitled to privacy and no one can invade her privacy as and when he likes
2. so also it is not open to any and every person to violate her person as and when he wishes
3. she is entitled to protect her person if there is an attempt to violate it against her wish. 
4. She is equally entitled to the protection of law.

 

300 CrPC

 

Statue

1. 300 CrPC
2. Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India

Important Points

1. nemo debt bis vexari
1. No man shall be put twice in peril for the same offence
2. autrefois acquit
1. the person has been acquitted on a same charge on which he is being proseucted.
3. 300 CrPC embodies the following 2 principles
1. nemo debt bis vexari
2. autrefois acquit 
4. 300 CrPC principles are slightly different from principle of double jeopardy embodied u/s A20(2) of the constitution of India
5. 
   

OU Law CrPC

 Date : 5th August 2021

Abetment - 306 IPC

 

Important points

1. To bring a case within the provision of Section 306 IPC, there must be 
1. Case of suicide
2. in commission of said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide MUST have played an active role by an act of instigating or by doing a certain act of facilitate the commission of suicide.
2. Mere harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to the suicide would not amount to offence u/s 306 IPC.

Case Law

1. Amalendu Pal Vs State of West Bengal 2010 1 SCC 707
1. Active role and certain act to facilitate commission of suicide
2. mere harassment without positive action and proximate to time of occurrence 
2. Chitresh Kumar Chopra Vs State ( Govt of NCT delhi ) 2009 16 SCC 605
1. Abetment by a person is when a person instigates another to do something
2. Instigation can be inferred where the accused had, by his acts or omission created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no option except to commit suicide.

Perjury - 193 IPC r/w 340 CrPC

 

Statue

1. 193 IPC r/w 340 CrPC

Important Points

1. Mere contradictory statements NOT itself always sufficient to justify prosecution for perjury.
2. It must establish that false statement was made INTENTIONALLY
3. Even when it is concluded that it was intentional false evidence - 
1. Court has to form opinion whether it is EXPEDIENT in the interest of Justice to Initiate an inquiry into offence of false evidence.
2. Consider overall factual matrix and probable consequences. 

Case Law

1. KTMS Mohammad & anr Vs UoI 1992 3 SCC 178
1. Para 37
1. The mere fact that a deponent has made contradictory statements at two different stages in a judicial proceeding is not by itself always sufficient to justify a prosecution for perjury under section 193 IPC 
2. But it must be established that the deponent has INTENTIONALLY  give a false statement in any stage of the judicial proceeding or fabricated false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of the judicial proceeding.
3. Further, such a prosecution for perjury should be taken only if it is expedient in the interest of Justice.
2. Amarsang Nathaji Vs Hardik Harshadbhai Patel & Ors 2017 1 SCC 113
1. Offense of false evidence and offense against public justice and more specifically referred in Section 340(1) CrPC, having regard to the overall factual matrix as well as the probable consequences of such a prosecution.
2. Even in a case where the Court comes to the conclusion on the aspect of intentional false evidence, 
1. still the court has to form an opinion whether it is expedient in the interest of justice to initiate an inquiry into the offense of false evidence, 
1. having regard to the overall factual matrix as well as probable consequences of such prosecution.

ADR

Date : 5th August 2021

1. Jamboard - Civil Court Jurisdiction

Date : 4th August 2021

1. Jamboard ( Multi pages )

Date : 3rd August 2021

1. Jamborad

Date : 28th July 2021

1. Jam board 
2. 

Date : 26th July 2021

1. Jamboar

 Books

1. Anirban Chakrborthy on ADR - Lexis Nexis
2. Mediation - Sriram Panchu, Adv ( Lexis Nexis)
3. O.P. Malhotra, Indu Malhotra on Arbitration (Reference)
4. Supreme Court Mediation Manual
5. Madabhushi Sridhar - ADR ( Student edition)

Passport

 

Statue 

1. Section 6(2)(f)  of Passport Act , passport authority SHALL refuse to issue a passport or travel document for visiting any foreign country, if a criminal proceeding is pending against the applicant in India. However that said provision does not provide for refusing to issue a passport for a person who intends to travel back to India. 

Important Points

1. Right to travel cannot be curtailed by refusing to renew passport on pretext of pending criminal cases
2. Passport Authorities
1. Refuse issuance of a fresh passport to a person against whom a criminal case is pending in India
2. Same rule would not apply for renewal of passport

Case Law

1. Satwant Singh Sawhney Vs D. Ramarathanm AIR 1967 SC 1836
1. U/s A21 of Constitution of India, no person can be deprived of his right to travel except according to procedure established by law.
2. Petitioner right to travel cannot be curtailed on the pretext that a criminal case is pending against him by refusing to renew his passport.

My Lord

 

1. Date : 30th July 2021
1. Punjab & Haryana High Court - Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi
1. It is for the information of the respected members of the Bar that Hon'ble justice Arun Kumar Tyagi has requested that respected members of the Bar may AVOID addressing him as "Your Lordship" or "My Lord" and also saying obliged and grateful. All concerned to note Please -  link
2. Date : 17th April 2021
1. Karnataka High Court : Justice Krishna Bhat
1. Court Hall No : 32, Cause list No : 1
2. NOTE : learned counsel are requested to avoid addressing the court with such Excessive honorific as "My Lord" or"Your Lordship". But are requested to Adhere to a practice consistent with dignity and decorum of court which is more appropriate in Indian Circumstances Like SIR
3. Date : 23rd February 2021
1. Supreme Court of India : CJI SA Bobde
1. When you call us Your Honour, you either have the Supreme Court of United States or the Magistrate in mind. We are neither . 
4. Date : 16th March 2020
1. Punjab & Haryan HC , Justice Murlidhar
1. It is for the information of respected members of the bar that Hon'ble Justice S. Murlidhar has requested that they may try and avoid addressing him as 'Your Lordship" or "My Lord", 
5. Date  : 16th July 2020
1. Calcutta High Court, CJ Thottathil B. Nair Radharkrishna
1. CJ addressed a letter to officers of district Judiciary including members of Registry, expressing his desire to be addressed as "SIR" instead of My lord or Lordship
6. Date : 16/01/2017
1.  Judge Rajesh Bindal & Jusrice Harinder Singh Sidhu : CWP No 531 / 2017  HC P&H : Verinder Pal Sharma Vs Bar Council of India
1. Grievance is petitioner used the word "My Lord"/ Your Lordship and as the use of words may violate the provisions of the rules, action may be taken against him
2. No provision in rules provides that violation of provisions u/s Chapter IIIA in Part VI of Rules - any actions could be taken against any advocate.
3. No reason to interfere
7. Date : January 2014
1. Supreme Court : Justice H.L Dattu and Justice S.A Bobde 
1. Addressing judges through such terms were not compulsory and judges only need to be addressed in a dignified manner.
2. You call it your honour, it is accepted, you call your lordship it is accepted. There are some appropriate way of expression which are accepted.
3. PIL by 75y Old advocate Shiv Sagar Tiwari
1. seeking court direction to strictly prohibit the use of 'my Lord' or 'your lordship' in courts alleging 'it is against the dignity of the country"
2. Words 'My Lord"/ "Your Lordship" are symbols of slavery should be strictly prohibited to be used in the courts throughout  India as it is against the dignity of the country
8. Date
1. Rajasthan High Court
9. Date : 2009
1. Madras High Court, Justice K. Chandru
1. Message on Notice Board requesting them not to address the court using Traditional Phrase My Lord.
10. Date : 2007
1. Kerala High Court Advocates Associations had unanimously resoved to stop addressing judges as 'My Lord' or "Your Lordship"
11. Date : 6th May 2006
1. Bar Council of India - Published Resolution in gazette of India - Resolution No 58/2006
1. Consistent with the obligation of the Bar to show a respectful attitude towards the Court and bearing in min the dignity of Judicial Office, the form of address to be adopted whether in the Supreme court, High Court or Subordinate Courts should be as follows: Your Honor or Hon'ble Court in Supreme Court & High Court and in the Subordinate courts and Tribunals it is open to the Lawyers to address the Court as Sir or the equivalent word in respective regional language. 
2. Rule made under section 49(1)(j) of the Advocates Act, 1961 be added as Chapter IIIA in Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules
1. Consistent with the obligation of the Bar to show a respectful attitude towards the Court bearing in mind the dignity of Judicial Officer, the form of address to be adopted whether in the Supreme Court, High Courts or Subordinate Courts should be as follows
2. "Your Honour" or "Hon'ble Court" in Supreme Court or High Court and in the Subordinate Courts and Tribunals it is open to the Lawyers to address the Court as Sir or the equivalent word in respective regional language
3. Explanation :  As the words "My Lord" and "Your Lordship" are relics of colonial past, it is proposed to incorporate the above rule showing respectful attitude to the Court.
4. The Rule shall come into force from the date of publication in the Official Gazette. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED to circulate the resolution to all the state Bar councils with a respect to the Bar Councils to circulate the same to all Bar Associations in their state and to the Courts. Letter should also be sent to the Supreme Court Bar Association, the Registrar General of the Supreme Court of India and the Registrars of all the High Courts.

Case Laws

1. PIL Progressive & Vigilant Lawyers Forum
1. 6th Jan 2006 - Dismissed the case - matter to be decided by the BCI as to how the Judges should be addressed

General Exceptions

 

Chapter IV : General Exceptions

1. No criminal Intent ( Incapable of criminal Intent )
2. Justified under Law to do the act

Section 77

1. Nothing done by Judge  when acting judicially in the exercise of any power which is or which in good faith be believe to be given him by law.
2. 19 Judge - denotes NOT only every person who is officially designated as Judge but also every person who is empowered by law to give, in any legal proceeding, civil or criminal a definitive judgement or a judgement which if not appealed against would be definitive or judgment which if confirmed by some other authority, would be definitive or 
1. Who is one of a body or person which body of persons is empowered by law to give such a judgment.

Section 78

1. Mistake of fact NOT by mistake of law in good faith believes bound by law to do it
1. 1981 4 SCC 2 ( WB Vs Theo mangal singh )
2. Bound by law  - specific law he has to follow

Section 79

1. if Justified by law or reason of a mistake of fact and not reason of a mistake of law in good faith
1. Justified law is not there, you are not prohibited under law you are justified by law to do the act.
1. AIR 1980 SC 605 ( Rajkapur vs Lakshman ) - Satyam Sivam Sundaram

Section 80 : accident in doing a lawful act - without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a law full act in lawful manner by lawful means and with proper care and caution.

- Redundant provision

- guilty of unlawful act which is charged 

- Lecture on criminal law by Huda

Section 81 : Act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent and to prevent other harm

1. Mens rea 
1. Doing act with knowledge - 
2. Doing act with Criminal Intention 
2. It is question of fact

Section 82 : Doli in capax : act of a child under 7y of age  in capable of offence - this presumption is conclusive and NO rebuttal 

Section 83 : Rebuttable presumption : Act of child above 7y and under 12y of immature understanding who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge of the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion.

1. Burden on the Prosecution - child is capable of understanding the nature and consequences of the act.
2. 1977 4 SCC 44

Section 84 : Act of a person of unsound mind : incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.

1. Mcnaughten - Insanity
2. 2010 10 SCC 582 - Sudakaran Vs State of Kerala -- history of Section 84
3. At the time of doing the act, he should suffer from unsoundness of time 
4. And because of that he was incapable of knowing the nature of the act.
5. What is unsoundness of mind? Not defined 
1. Insanity - He should suffer from some form medical insanity 
2. Legal Insanity - there has to some thing more - he must be incapable of nature of the act
6. Test for Incapable of doing the act
1. Deliberation and preparation of doing the act. - answer is Yes then not passed test
2. Whether it was done in a manner to try to conceal the act - capable of knowing the nature of the act.
3. After the crime the offender shows conciseness of guild and avoid detection - then also he is capable
4. if he gave false statement investigation
5. all these Test are only inferential and NOT conclusive . Court is final arbiter
7. case law
1. 2011 11 SCC 495 - surender Mishra Vs state of Jarkhand
2. Bapu vs State  of 2007 8 SCC 636
3. Srikanth Anand rao Vs State of Maharastra   2002 7 SCC 748

Section 85 : act of a person incapable of judgment by reason of intoxication caused against his will 

1. Law presumes - if intoxication is incapable of judgment
2. such intoxication should be without of his knowledge
3. because of intoxication - unable to knowing the nature act he was doing    

Section 86 : is not Exception it is Explanation.  dealt with as if he had same knowledge as he would have had if had not been intoxicated 

1. Burden of proof on the accused - 105 of IEA - court presumes absence  of exceptions.
2. Standard of Proof is Preponderance of Probability
1. 1974 4 SCC 764
2. 1964 7 SCR 361

General Exceptions - applicable to all the offense

Chapter II : General Explanations

Definition in the code to be understood subject to exceptions r/w General Exceptions

Special Exceptions - Definition it self gives these exceptions

1. Defamation
2. Murder

MP/ MLA Privileges

 

MP/ MLA Case

1. Immunities and Privileges
1. Protest by MLA protected by immunities and privileges under A194(3) of Constitution of India
1. Privileges u/s A194 cannot be used to cover for violent actions of members in the precincts of LA
2. Lokayukta Justice Ripusuan Dayal Vs State of MP 2014 4 SCC 473
1. Privileges can only be provided to the extent required so as to allow the members to perform the function without hindrance.
2. Privilege cannot be used as shield to circumvent the application of criminal law since NO person enjoys privilege against criminal Prosecution. 
2. Breach of Privilege - Breach of Privilege is a contempt of the House, which falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Speaker of the Assembly.
1. There is NO PROVISION under Constitution or Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in persuant of A208(1) that mandate police to seek permission or sanction of speaker before registering a crime against a MLA.
3. Public Interest : Freedom of MLA are necessary for the functioning of democracy and are subject to the power of Speaker or the criminal court with the sanction of the speaker
4. Absence of Mens Rea : 
5. Lack of Evidence
1. Such arguments regarding inadequacy of evidence for successful conviction must be raised accused while seeking discharge
1. Sheonandan Paswan Vs State of Bihar (1987) 1 SCC 288
6. Case Law
1. P.V Narasimha Rao Vs State ( CBI/SPE) Etc AIR 1998 SC 2120
1. Immunity can be claimed by MLA's ONLY in exercise of free speech and voting 

321 CrPC

 

Statue

1. 321 CrPC : Withdrawal of Prosecution
1. The Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor in charge of a case may, with the consent of the court, at any time before the judgement is pronounced withdraw from the prosecution of any person either generally or in respect of any one or more of the offenses for which he is tried; and upon such withdrawal
2. (a) if it is made before a charge has been framed the accused shall be discharged in respect of such offence or offences
3. (b) if it is made after a charge has been framed or when under this code no charge is required, he shall be acquitted in respect of such offence or offences.
4. Provided that where such offence
1. was against any law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the Union extends or
2. was investigation by the Delhi Special Police Establishment under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946
3. Involved the misappropriation or destruction of or damage to any property belonging to the central government or
4. was committed by a person in the service of the central government while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, and the Prosecutor in charge of the case has not been appointed by the Central Government he shall not unless he has been permitted by the central govt

Important Points

1. Role of Court 
1. Access whether the application is made in good faith, in the interest of justice and public policy
2. NOT to stifle the process of law
3. PRESUMED application filed without good faith is based on external influence.
4. The Real TEST 
1. Decision of PP will destroy the administration of Justice
5. Power of court to grant consent for a withdrawal petition is similar to the power under Section 320 CrPC to compound offences
6. Court in 321, 320 CrPC - will NOT have to enquire into the issue of conviction or acquittal of accused person and will only need to restrict itself to providing CONSENT through the exercise of jurisdiction in supervisory manner.
7. 321  does not provide any grounds for seeking withdrawal
1. Public policy,
2. interest of administration of Justice
1. Scrutinize the nature and gravity of the offence and its impact upon public life especially matters involving public funds and discharge of public trust
3. inexpediency to proceed with the prosecution for reasons of state and 
4. paucity of evidence.
5. ONLY restrict itself to ONLY determining if the Prosecutor has exercised the power for the above legitimate reasons.
8. Acquittal or discharge order u/s 321 are not same as the normal final orders in criminal case
1. Conclusion wont be backed by a detailed discussion of the evidence in the case acquittal or absence of prima facie cases or groundlessness in the case of discharge.
2. Public Prosector 
1. should form independent opinion before seeking the consent of the court to withdraw from the prosecution
2. 
   

Case Law

1. Rajendra Kumar Jain Vs State through Special Police Establishment & Ors (1980) 3 SCC 435
1. Power of PP to withdraw from the prosecution for one or more offenses can be exercised in furtherance of public Justice - social, economic & Political
2. Offence that the respondent are accused of committing occurred during the presentation of State Budge, in the premises of LA
3. Their actions are manifestations of effective political participation, and are in furtherance of political purpose which is valid ground for withdrawal of prosecution
2. State of Bihar Vs Ram Naresh Pandey & Anr
1. Section 494 of earlier CrPC 1898
2. Granting consent to withdraw prosecution the court exercises a judicial function.
3. However, in doing so the court need not determine the matter judicially.
4. Court ONLY has to satisfy that Executive function of PP has NOT been improperly exercised or that it is not an attempt to interfere with the normal course of justice for illegitimate reasons or purposes.
5. Magistrate power u/s 494 CrPC  - to prevent abuse of power of the executive.
3. M.N Sankaraynarayanan Nair Vs P. V Balakrishnan 1972 1 SCC 318
1. Power conferred on PP u/s 494 crpc 1898 are to be exercised in furtherance of the object of law
2. Para 8
1. The court also while considering the request to grant permission under the said setion should not do so as necessary formality - the grant of it is for mere asking.
2. It may do so only if it is satisfied on the materials placed before it that the grant of it subserves the administration of justice and that permission was not being sought covertly with an ulterior purpose unconnected with the vindication of the law which the executive organ are in duty bound to further and maintain.
4. Rajendra Kumar Jain Vs State through Special Police Establishment
1. George Fernandes, accused of rousing resistance against the Emergency 1975 and participatinging in conspiracy to do acts which may have resulted in destruction of property
2. Special PP filed S321 in view of changed circumstances and public Interest.

Alternative Remedy

 

Important points

1. Where alternative remedy existed, It would be sound exercise of discretion to refuse to interfere in a petition under A226.
1. UNLESS there are good grounds therefor
2. Indicating that alternative remedy would NOT operate as an ABSOLUTE BAR and writ petition u/s A226 could still be entertained in exceptional circumstances 
2. Exhaustion of statutory remedies before write will be granted is a rule of policy convenience and discretion RATHER than rule of law and numerous instances where write of certiorari has been issued in spite of the fact that aggrieved party had other adequate legal remedies.
3. Writ is ordinarily not maintainable when there exists an alternative remedy
1. Exceptions to this rule are - statutory authority has not acted accordance with the provisions of the legislation
2. or acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of Judaical procedure
3. Or order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
4. No bar operates atleast for 3 contingencies
1. Writ filed for enforcement of Fundamental Rights
2. Violation of the principle of natural justice
3. Order or proceeding are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an act is challenged.

Case Law

1. Whirlpool Corporation Vs Registrar of Trademark (1998) 8 SCC 1
2. Radha Krishan Industries vs state of Himachal Pradesh 2021 SCCOnline SC 334
3. Rashid Ahmad Vs Municipal Board AIR 1960 SC 163
1. Where alternative remedy existed, sound exercise of discretion to refuse to interfere u/s A226
4. State of UP Vs Mohd Nooh 1958 SCR 595
1. Alternative remedy would not operate as an absolute bar and that writ petition u/s A226 could be still entertained under exceptional circumstances. 

Woman - privileges

 

Stats of women in Prison

1. Women in prison - PIB MWoC
1. 2015
1. Total person in Jail = 4,19,623
2. Women in Jail = 17,834 ( 4.3%)
3. Under trail women = 11,916 ( 66.8% of women in Jail)
2. 2000
1. Women in Jail = 3.3% ( of all the person in Jail )
3. Age Group
1. 30-50 = 50.5%
2. 18-30 = 31.3%
4. Prisons
1. Total Prison = 1401
2. Exclusive for women = 18

Bail

1. 437 CrPC - Special Right of bail in favor of a person
1. < 16y or woman or sick or infirm - MAY be released on bail
1. BUT
1. person SHALL not be so released, if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of a offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
2. Such person shall not be so released if such offence is a cognizable offence and he had previously convicted of an offence punishable with death imprisonment for life or imprisonment for 7y or more or he had been previously convicted on 2 or more occasions of a Non bailable and cognizable offence.
2. Provided that court may direct that a person referred to in clause (1) or clause (2) be released on bail 
1. if such person is < 16y  or woman or is sick or infirm
2. Provided further that court MAY also direct that a person referred to in clause(2) be release on bail if it is satisfied that it is just and proper so to do for any other special reason.
2. Article 51(c) Constitution of India
1. The state shall endeavor to 
1. foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organized peoples with one another.
2. Rule 64 of United Nations rules for treatment of women Prisoners and non custodial Measure for women offenders ( the bangkok rules ) - adopted on 21 dec 2010
1. non custodial sentences for pregnant women and women with dependent children shall be preferred where possible and appropriate
2. Custodial sentence being considered when the offence is serious or violent or the women represents a continuing danger and after taking into account the best interest of child or children, while ensuring the appropriate provisions has been made for the care of such children.
3. Pregnant women NEED Bail, NOT jail
1. Sacrosanct freedom of women in motherhood pro tanto.
2. Even if offenses are highly grave and accusations very severe - they still deserve temporary bail or suspension of sentence, extending to a year after delivery.
3. Even those who are convicted and their appeals closed also deserve similar relief
4. Good nutritious food in prisons may be given good health, it cannot substitute for good mental health.
1. Restraint and confined spaces cause mental stress to a pregnant woman giving birth in jail might cause tremendous trauma
5. Ill effects that a prison environment could have on a child born in jail
1. social hatred might follow, potentially creating ever lasting impact on mind whenever questioned about birth.
6. Case Law
1. Tin Sei Minthang Touthang Vs Officer in Charge Moirang police station, Manipur 2021 Cri LJ 19
1. HC Manipur granted bail to pregnant women carrying 7m pregnancy 
2. Despite accusations of involvement in a Huge quantity of Opium 
1. But NO bad antecedents
2. Rekha Vs State of Karnataka Cr Pet No 200107/ 2021
1. Case of causing death of 5 person
2. Karnataka HC granted bail - no allegations against her of overt acts and also because she was pregnant
3. State of Gujarat Vs Jadav Cr A No 652/ 2008 
1. Convicting in an appeal imposed the sentence on convicts for 7y for dowry death
2. Simultaneously suspended sentence for around 10m of a pregnant convict.

Pegasus Spyware

 

Important Points

1. Pegasus Spyware - product sold by Isreal NSO Group
2. Target list of phones hacked / to be hacked by Pegasus 
1. 136 numbers of politicians, judges, journalist, businessmen, rights activists and head of state in world including that of India
3. RS MP John Brittas moved SC seeking probe by SIT in Pegasus snooping
4. ML Sharma - seeking court monitored probe into pegasus snooping scandal

Law

1. A21 - Right to life and personal liberty
1. No person shall be deprived of his life for personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law
2. Autorized snooping - can be done in India Only by followin the procedures of lawful interceptions mandated by law u/s
1. Section 5(2) of Indian Telegraph Act 1885 
2. Section 69 of Information Technology Act ( Amendment ) 2000
3. Section 92 CrPC 
4. Rule 419(a) of Indian Telegraph Rules

UAPA

 

1. No trade off b/w protection of human rights and effective action against terrorism
2. Long term human right + democracy are best protection against terrorism
3. 
   

Case 

1. National Investigation Agency Vs Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali - link 
2. UoI Vs K .A. Najeeb  - link
3. 
   

Source : 

1. https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/democracy-dissent-and-draconian-law-livelaw-webinar-178074

OU3YDC - 2019-22 - 4th Semester

 

Date : 19th July  2021 

Class : ADR ( Alternate Dispute Resolution )

Faculty : S B Md Irfan Ali Abbas ( 98488 85394 )

Attendance :

Syllabus 

Date : 19th July  2021 

Class : CPC ( Civil Procedure Code )

Faculty : Rama Rao ( 97019 86054)

Attendance :

161/162/164 CrPC

 

Statute

• 161
• 162
• 164 CrPC
• Statement required to be recorded by a judicial magistrate under that particular section in due discharge of his judicial functions 
• as such the act of recording the statement was judicial act which was performed by a public servant while discharging judicial functions
• Document is relevant u/s Section 35 of IEA and also Section 72 of IEA ( assumes the character of being public document )

Important Points

• 164 CrPC
• Statement u/s 164 CrPC could not strictu sensu be said to be mere statement during investigation which could be treated a part of teh case diary
• It could never be put at part with a statement u/s 161 crPC and and as such it could never be said to be part of case diary

145 CrPC - Compliance with 161 CrPC 

Taslidar  Singh

AIR 1959 SC 1012 

Sensitive and sentimental women - sprit of revange 

Sharat B AIR 1984 SC 1622

Women have uncanny abitiy of women

AIR 1983 SC 446

Case Law

• Bashiruddin Vs Emperor AIR 1932 Allahabad 327
• Statements u/s 164 CrPC was public record and that was bound to be supplied to the accused on admissible cost if he had applied for it. 
• An accused is undoubtedly entitled to inspect statements of prosecution witness recorded u/s 164 CrPC
• Such statements can be used by the prosecution for corroborating the witness.