Lawwatch : Legal Resources for Learners

Trial for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) can proceed in the absence of the accused and without recording a statement under Section 313 CrPC, if the accused or their advocate has not been attending the trial or the accused has not sought for dispensing personal attendance, says the Bombay High Court in Navneet Singh Gogia & Another v State of Maharashtra & Another [2025:BHC-AS:3054].

Any lapse or delay in compliance of Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) would neither vitiate the trial nor would entitle the accused to be released on bail, the Supreme Court (SC) says in Narcotics Control Bureau v Kashif [2024 INSC 1045].

Public outcry for imposing death penalty in every case of murder, such as Sharon Raj murder case, is quite common nowadays. But the law says that the imposition of death penalty should be awarded only in the rarest of rare cases of exceptional nature.

The Kerala High Court declined to quash the FIR stating that the accused has made sexually coloured remarks and overtures and commented that the body structure of the complainant was “fine” followed by sending messages with sexual overtures to the complainant in R. Ramachandran Nair v State of Kerala & Others [2025: KER:356]

Maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Proceedings (CrPC) are essentially civil in nature and should not be equated with criminal proceedings merely because they involve a penal consequence, says the SC in Rina Kumari @ Rina Devi @ Reena v Dinesh Kumar Mahto @ Dinesh Kumar Mahato & Another [2025 INSC 55].

Every judgment is not meant to be a binding precedent, says the Supreme Court (SC) in NBCC (India) ltd. v The State of West Bengal & Others [2025 INSC 54].

The Supreme Court (SC) in Pruthvirajsinh N Jadeja(D) By Lrs. v Jayeshkumar Chhakaddasm Shah [2019 (9) SCC 533], says that it is a well settled law that mere mentioning of an incorrect provision is not fatal to the application if the power to pass such an order is available with the court.

Non-recovery of weapon used 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].