Law in one Paragraph

Virendra Singh vs. State Of M.P [Criminal Appeal No.1316 of 2002]: Supreme Court of India Distinction between section 34 and section 149 of the Indian Penal Code 51. There is a substantial difference between these two sections with which we would deal in the later part of this judgment. When several persons, numbering five or […]

Rohit vs. State [CRL.A. 333/2020 & CRL.M.(B.) 7465/2020]: Delhi High Court Conviction on the sole evidence of the child witness is permissible, if the witness is found competent and the testimony is trustworthy 21. The law on the evaluation of the testimony of a child victim is well settled. This Court in the case of

Lillu vs. State of Haryana [AIR 2013 SC 1784]: Supreme Court of India Even in cases where there is some material to show that the victim was habituated to sexual intercourse, no inference of the victim being a women of “loose moral character” can be drawn 11. In State of Punjab v. Ramdev Singh, AIR

Chandrappa & Ors vs State Of Karnataka [2007 4 SCC 415]: Supreme Court of India General principles regarding powers of appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal 42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of appellate Court while dealing with an appeal

Vishal Rajendra Jadhav And Ors vs. The State of Maharashtra [Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2011]: Bombay High Court Magistrate can charge accused for less grave offences despite charge sheet being having been filed for graver offence 3. It is quite clear that, in deciding whether action shall be taken by him under sub-s. (2)

Balwant vs The State of Maharashtra [Criminal Appeal No.292 of 2009]: Bombay High Court Fine cannot be imposed more than one suggested by the Code 7. Text of the section 323 of the Indian Penal Code manifestly makes it clear that imprisonment attracted to Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code is of “either” “or” description i.e. either imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or

A. Shyamal Bihari Mishra and Ors. vs Girish Narain Missir and Anr. AIR 1962 Pat 116 It is a cardinal principle of the law of procedure that the decree should agree with the judgment. Where, therefore, its decree is at variance with its judgment, and, when the decree does not correctly express what was really

Dwaraka Das v. State of M.P and Another [(1999) 3 SCC 500]: Supreme Court of India Section 152 C.P.C. provides for correction of clerical arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission. It is not a power to review a judgement/decree or order. 6. Section 152

State of Gujarat and Anr. vs. Shri Ambika Mills Ltd., Ahmedabad [(1974) 4 SCC 656]: Supreme Court of India A reasonable classification is one which includes all who are similarly situated 52. It would be an idle parade of familiar learning to review the multitudinous cases in which the constitutional assurance of equality before the

The State of West Bengal vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar [AIR 1952 SC 75]: Supreme Court of India Offences or cases cannot be classified in two categories on the basis of the preamble alone 62. I have already stated that this part of the sub­ section contemplates a process of classification of “offences”, “classes of offences”