Criminal law

Non receipt of evidence regarding the use of weapon in the commission of the offence is of no consequences at all when the circumstances in the case established beyond doubt that it was the accused who caused the death of the victim, despite no recovery of weapon, says the High Court of Kerala in Satheesh Babu v State of Kerala [2023:KER:78326].

A victim can file an appeal in a criminal offence against any judgment or order passed by the court only under three circumstances, such as acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1972 (CrPC).

In paragraph 8 of the judgement in Ravinder Kumar v State of NCT of Delhi [2024 INSC 211 ], the Supreme Court (SC) says that the law regarding conviction on the basis of circumstantial evidence is crystallized in Sharada Birdhichand Sarada v State of Maharashtra [ AIR 1984 SC 1622].

The prosecution of the offence of perjury or forgery coming under Section 195 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) as the part of judicial proceedings can be done by a special procedure provided under 340 of the Criminal Procedure code, 1973 (CrPC).

Right to private defence is a right every citizen has when faced with grave danger to his life or property, under Sections 96 to 106 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860. The IPC states nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of self-defence. In order to ascertain whether any act done falls under right to self-defence, the Sections 96 to 106 of the IPC need to be examined as a whole.

Two different versions of the same incident resulting into two criminal cases are described as “case and counter case” by some High Courts or just “cross cases” by some others, says the High Court of Kerala in Faizal v State of Kerala [2024 (3) KHC 322].

Investigation by police is the first stage in the criminal proceedings. It is an exclusive domain of police. It serves as a crucial step in punishing the offender. The police have unfettered powers to investigate into a cognizable offence, as per Section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

The Section 216 CrPC enables a court to alter or add to any charge at any time before judgement is pronounced, and an improper or erroneous charge can also be corrected under the section by reframing it properly, says the High Court of Kerala (HCK) in Johnkutty M V v State of Kerala [2024:KER:14955 : 2024 (2) KHC 397].

When any offence involving an Indian citizen is committed outside of India, the trial should not be processed with, without the prior sanction of the Central Government under Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), says Telangana High Court in two Criminal Petitions No 6110 of 2022 and 6074 of 2022.

A man cannot be held guilty for abetment of suicide of his wife, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal code (IPC) read with Section 113 A of the Indian Evidence Act (IEA), within seven years of marriage, unless there is cogent evidence of harassment or cruelty, the Supreme Court has said in Naresh Kumar v State of Haryana [2024 (1) KLD 427 (SC)].

In Pathapathi Subba Reddy (Died) By Legal Heirs & Others v Special Deputy Collector (LA), the Supreme Court (SC) laid down eight principles to be followed while seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals, by providing harmonious construction to Sections 3 and 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

On the basis of evidence on record in a court proceeding, if two equally sustainable views - one in favourable to the accused and the other against him - are equally possible, the court should take the one that is favourable to the accused, but not the other, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Chandrappa & Others v State of Karnataka