Anticipatory Bail: Must the Sessions Court Be Approached Before the High Court?

14 September 2025Posted inCriminal law
The Supreme Court recently reinforced this view in Mohammed Rasal C. & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr., noting the consistent practice across most states. The Court clarified that while High Courts can entertain direct applications in special or extra-ordinary circumstances, these reasons must be recorded in writing. This aligns with the five-judge bench decision in Ankit Bharti v. State of UP & Anr., which held that it is for the concerned judge to determine if such special circumstances exist.

Four-Step Test for Quashing an FIR: SC

11 September 2025Posted inCriminal law
In Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of UP, the Supreme Court, noting that this power was not always being used effectively, laid down a clear four-step process for High Courts to consider when hearing quashing petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

Loss of Consortium includes Spousal, Parental, and Filial Rights

8 September 2025Posted inMotor Vehicles Act
The law was clarified by a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court in The New India Assurance Company v. Somwati (2020). Relying on the principles established by a two-judge bench in Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram & others [(2018) 18 SCC 130], the Court recognized three distinct categories of consortium: spousal, parental, and filial.

The Courts must Apply Triple Test while Granting Bail

6 September 2025Posted inBail & Related matters
The "Triple Test" (or Tripod Test) remains the cornerstone of bail jurisprudence. As restated by the Supreme Court in P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement [AIR 2019 SC 4198], the principle requires courts to assess three primary factors before granting bail: The risk of the accused absconding if released. The risk of the accused tampering with evidence. The risk of the accused influencing or intimidating witnesses.