Right to Private Defence :SC Guidelines on its Exercise

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.

Proving Unsoundness of Mind of Executant of a Sale Deed

n proving that an executant in a sale deed is of sound mind, mere production of a medical certificate is not enough while determining the mental state at the time of the execution of a sale deed, and capacity of the executant, but the opinion of the doctor who treated the executant brought on record by examining and cross examining him in the court is necessary, the High Court of Kerala states in Kunhalima vs Mahammed [2024(3)KHC SN 15(Page No 70].

Contradiction by Omission u/s 62(2) CrPC

The Explanation to Section 162(2) of CrPC deals with omission. It states, “An omission to state a fact or circumstance in the statement referred to in sub- section (1) may amount to contradiction if the same appears to be significant and otherwise relevant having regard to the context in which such omission occurs and whether any omission amounts to a contradiction in the particular context shall be a question of fact”.

Corroboration of Evidence u/s 157 of IEA

A former statement given by a witness before any authority legally competent to investigate the case at or about the time when the fact took place, needs to be proved to corroborate any later testimony (relating to the same fact or event) given by the witness in the court. Then the former statement is admitted as corroborative evidence when it is consistent with the later testimony, under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act.

Stridhan Property is Wife’s Absolute Property

Stridhan property is essentially what is gifted to a woman before marriage, at the time of marriage or at the time of bidding of farewell or thereafter and it is an “absolute property” of a woman. The husband has no control over it and it does not become a joint property of the wife and the husband. But he can use it in times of distress and he has a “moral obligation” to restore the same or its value to his wife, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Maya Gopinath v Anoop S B [2024 INSC 334].

Joinder of Charges under CrPC

The Section 218 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) insists that there would be separate trial for separate charges and that every distinct offence a person is accused of shall be charged separately, says the High court of Kerala in Santosh @ Chandu v State [2024 (1) KLD 714] .

No Easement by Necessity if Alternate Way Exists

The claimant of an easement right wouldn't be entitled to claim the easement right by necessity when there exists an alternative way to access the claimant’s land, apart from the way over which the easement rights were claimed, the Supreme Court (SC) says in Manish Mahendra Gala v Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani [2024 INSC 293].