Narco-Analysis Test Infringes Fundamental Rights: SC
The Supreme Court (SC) in Amlesh Kumar v The State of Bihar [2025 INSC 810], States that narco-analysis tests on accused individuals cannot be done without their consent.
Appellate Court Cannot Enhance Sentence in an Appeal by the Convict
An appellate court cannot enhance the sentence in an appeal filed by the convict, as it violates the principle of fairness and the statutory scheme under Section 386(b)(iii) Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which prohibits enhancement in such appeals, says the Supreme Court ( SC) in Sachin v State Of Maharashtra [2025 INSC 518].
SC Warns Against Cruel Misuse of 498A Cases by Wife
The Supreme Court (SC), in Rajesh Chaddha v State of Uttar Pradesh [2025 INSC 671] warns against the cruel misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and such other provisions of law against husband and in-laws by the wife and her relatives, without concrete evidence.
Prior Sanction Required for Prosecution of Public Servants When Alleged Acts Have Nexus with Official Functions
In G.C. Manjunath v. Seetaram [2025 INSC 439], the Supreme Court held that prior government sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is required before prosecuting a public servant, even when the alleged acts exceed official duties, provided such acts are reasonably connected with the discharge of official functions.
Criminal Law Cannot be Set in Motion Suppressing Material Facts
The Supreme Court (SC) addressed the issue of whether the complaint filed by a complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, suppressing material facts, is valid in Rekha Sharad Ushir v Saptashrungi Mahila Nagari Sahkari Patsansta Ltd [ 2025 INSC 399].
Additional Witness can be Examined u/s 311 CrPC, if Court Permits
An additional witness summoned as per Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) can be examined as a Prosecution Witness if the court finds that such a person ought to have been examined as a prosecution witness, but was omitted due to oversight, mistake or for any other reason.
Demand of Bribe to be Proved in Bribery Case : SC Constitutional bench
A Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court (SC) declares, in Neeraj Dutta v State ( Govt of NCT, New Delhi) [2023(1) KLD 1 (SC), that the proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a Public Servant is a sine qua non to establish the guilt under Section 7 & 13 (1) (d) (i) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PCA).
What a Magistrate can do When he Receives a Complaint?
On receipt of a written complaint, under Section 2(d) CrPC, a Judicial Magistrate or Special Judge, who is competent to take cognizance of the case, have five options to take, says the High Court of Kerala in Dr. Mathew A. Kuzhalnadan v Pinarayi Vijayan & Others [2025:KER:26809].
Ordering CBI Investigation cannot be Challenged by Prospective Accused
A direction for an investigation by the CBI issued by a constitutional court is not open to challenge by the prospective suspect or accused, and the matter for entrusting investigation to a particular agency is basically the discretion of the court, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Ramachandraiah & Another v M Manjula & Others [2025 INSC 556].
Investigation by CBI may be Ordered in Exceptional Cases, But not as a Routine Manner
The Supreme Court (SC), in a catena of cases, has set some broad guidelines for transferring cases to the CBI.
Kerala High Court also says involvement of CBI should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances.