Why is it Important for Judges to Use the Right Words?
The language a judge uses reflects not only their interpretation of the law, but their perception of society as well.
Even when the use of stereotypes does not alter the outcome of a case, stereotypical language may reinforce ideas contrary to our constitutional ethos.
Language is critical to the life of the law. Words are the vehicle through which the values of the law are communicated.
Words transmit the ultimate intention of the lawmaker or the judge to the nation.
β EXCELLENT USE - While writing your Answer just mention one of the new term and in bracket use the old one.
#quote
#Discernible_Topics
@CurrentLegalGK
The language a judge uses reflects not only their interpretation of the law, but their perception of society as well.
Even when the use of stereotypes does not alter the outcome of a case, stereotypical language may reinforce ideas contrary to our constitutional ethos.
Language is critical to the life of the law. Words are the vehicle through which the values of the law are communicated.
Words transmit the ultimate intention of the lawmaker or the judge to the nation.
β EXCELLENT USE - While writing your Answer just mention one of the new term and in bracket use the old one.
#quote
#Discernible_Topics
@CurrentLegalGK
π7β€6π₯3π―2
π³οΈElection commission of IndiaIssue: Appointment procedure of CEC & ECs
πRECENT DEVELOPMENT
π Bill Introduced in parliamentβ
The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Bill, 2023
β’To override the S.C. unanimous verdictβ
π [S.C. verdict] 2023
Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India
π¨ββοΈConstitutional bench comprising
β’ K.M. Joseph β’ Ajay Rastogi
β’ Aniruddha Bose β’ Hrishikesh Roy
β’ C.T. Ravikumar
π‘οΈIssues:
1. Does the current process for ECI appointments violate the right to equalityβ
2. Does the current process for ECI appointments violate the right to free and fair electionsβ
ππ’Contentions by Both the sides
β½Petitionerβ
β’ Article 14 - Arbitrary
β’ No law made under 326 till now
β’ Independence of ECI
β½Respondentβ
β’ Parliament not obliged to make law for appointment under 326.
β’ Article 50 - Separation of powers.
π₯Held- [Not a Mandamus writ but interim order untill law is enacted this is also known as Stop Gap Measures.]
β¦οΈHigh power committee comprising of (CJI, PM & leader of opposition) will make recommendations to president.
β¦οΈTerm of ECI is not 6 yrs currently due to erroneous appointments.
β¦οΈFreedom to vote (A.19)
Right to vote (A. 326
β¦οΈRight to vote is merely a
constitutional right by majority (but Dissent by justice rastogi cited Article 15, 17 ,19 and 21 Due to princely states it was not made F.R. at that time)
β Readings referred by Courtβ
βοΈ255th Law commission reports.
βοΈConstitutional debates.
βοΈ2nd Adminstrative reforms commission.
βοΈElectoral Reforms 1990 & 2010
β Extra readingsβ
βKesavanamd bharti - Rule of Law
βShamsher singh vs Punjab -
(Article 50)
βPeopleβs Union
for Civil Liberties v. Union of India -
βFree and fair election is a basic structure of the Constitution.
β Vineet Narain & Ors. v. UOI
Court spelt out its obligation under Article 32 to protect and enhance fundamental rights even in the absence of legislation.
β 1992 cases on fair elections.
β’Kihoto hollohan
β’Common cause vs UOI
β Types of Voting Rights
β Election petition
β Role of judiciary and ECI in case of conflict/misconduct in election.
β Freebies, election manifesto etc..
π @CurrentLegalGK
#Case_brief
#Electoral_reforms #Judicial_activism
#Executive_vs_judiciary
β€βπ₯7π4
Important Judgement Given by Hon'ble SC 2 Judges Bench CJI DY CHANDRACHUD & HIMA KOHLI
Prohibiting 'Two-Finger Test' in rape cases
Two Finger test was conducting on the victim to determine whether she was raped (Hymen Checking)
Women can't be believed when she states that she was raped merely for the reason that she is actively active.
Incorrect assumption that a sexually active women can't be raped .
The Two finger test has no scientific basis, it instead re-victimises & re-traumatises woman.
Earlier a judgement was delivered by SC regarding prohibition on Two finger test
Lilu vs st.of Haryana 2013 held that two finger test violates the Rt.of privacy of a woman #Article21.
SC IF ANYONE CONDUCTS A TWO FINGER TEST ON A SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIM IT WILL BE CONSTRUED AS THE OFFENCE OF MISCONDUCT & WILL BE PENALIZED ACCORDING.
Also SC stated it's based on patriachal mindset that sexually active women can't be raped
A woman's sexual history is immaterial while adjudicating whether the accused raped her .
CASE - ST. OF JHARKHAND VS SHAILENDRA KUMAR RAI 2022
Prohibiting 'Two-Finger Test' in rape cases
Two Finger test was conducting on the victim to determine whether she was raped (Hymen Checking)
Women can't be believed when she states that she was raped merely for the reason that she is actively active.
Incorrect assumption that a sexually active women can't be raped .
The Two finger test has no scientific basis, it instead re-victimises & re-traumatises woman.
Earlier a judgement was delivered by SC regarding prohibition on Two finger test
Lilu vs st.of Haryana 2013 held that two finger test violates the Rt.of privacy of a woman #Article21.
SC IF ANYONE CONDUCTS A TWO FINGER TEST ON A SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIM IT WILL BE CONSTRUED AS THE OFFENCE OF MISCONDUCT & WILL BE PENALIZED ACCORDING.
Also SC stated it's based on patriachal mindset that sexually active women can't be raped
A woman's sexual history is immaterial while adjudicating whether the accused raped her .
CASE - ST. OF JHARKHAND VS SHAILENDRA KUMAR RAI 2022
#Sec_53(A)_IEA_1872 βevidence of a victimβs character or of her previous sexual experience with any person shall not be relevant to the issue of consent or the quality of consent, in prosecutions of sexual offencesβ.π5β€2π1
Supreme Court Seeks Centreβs Response On Plea To Decriminalise Consensual Sex By 16-18 Year Olds
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-seeks-centres-response-on-plea-to-decriminalise-consensual-sex-by-16-18-year-olds-235623
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-seeks-centres-response-on-plea-to-decriminalise-consensual-sex-by-16-18-year-olds-235623
www.livelaw.in
Supreme Court Seeks Centreβs Response On Plea To Decriminalise Consensual Sex By 16-18 Year Olds
On Friday, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, heard a Public Interest Litigation (PIL)...
β‘π₯ Secunderabad Club vs CIT | 2023/ ARTICLE 141 EXPLANATION
Observations regarding the concept of ratio decidendi and binding.
1. What is binding in terms of Article 141 of the Constitution is the ratio of the judgment and as already noted, the ratio decidendi of a judgment is the reason assigned in support of the conclusion.
2. The reasoning of a judgment can be discerned only upon reading of a judgment in its entirety and the same has to be culled out thereafter.
3. The ratio of the case has to be deduced from the facts involved in the case and the particular provision(s) of law which the court has applied or interpreted and the decision has to be read in the context of the particular statutory provisions involved in the matter.
4.
5.
6. The decision is an authority for what is specifically decides and not what can logically be deduced therefrom.
7. The precedential value of an order of the Supreme Court which is not preceded by a detailed judgment would be lacking inasmuch as an issue would not have been categorically dealt with.
8. Declaration of the law by the Supreme Court can be said to have been made only when it is contained in a speaking order, either expressly or by necessary implication and not by dismissal in limine.
9. The precedential value of an order of the Supreme Court which is not preceded by a detailed judgment would be lacking inasmuch as an issue would not have been categorically dealt with order is binding on the parties to the said order, but in our view, it cannot act as a precedent for subsequent cases such as the present one with which we are dealing.
10. If an order of this Court is brief and meant only for the purpose of closure of the controversy involved in a particular case and with a view to conclude the case, undoubtedly, such an order is binding on the parties to the said order, but in our view, it cannot act as a precedent for subsequent cases such as the present one with which we are dealing.
#Ratio_decidendi #stare_decisis
#Article_141 #Obiter_dicta
#concept
#Discernible_Topics
@CurrentLegalGK
Observations regarding the concept of ratio decidendi and binding.
1. What is binding in terms of Article 141 of the Constitution is the ratio of the judgment and as already noted, the ratio decidendi of a judgment is the reason assigned in support of the conclusion.
2. The reasoning of a judgment can be discerned only upon reading of a judgment in its entirety and the same has to be culled out thereafter.
3. The ratio of the case has to be deduced from the facts involved in the case and the particular provision(s) of law which the court has applied or interpreted and the decision has to be read in the context of the particular statutory provisions involved in the matter.
4.
An order made merely to dispose of the case cannot have the value or effect of a binding precedent.5.
Although the obiter dictum of the Supreme Court is binding on all courts, it has only persuasive authority as far as the Supreme Court itself is concerned.6. The decision is an authority for what is specifically decides and not what can logically be deduced therefrom.
7. The precedential value of an order of the Supreme Court which is not preceded by a detailed judgment would be lacking inasmuch as an issue would not have been categorically dealt with.
8. Declaration of the law by the Supreme Court can be said to have been made only when it is contained in a speaking order, either expressly or by necessary implication and not by dismissal in limine.
9. The precedential value of an order of the Supreme Court which is not preceded by a detailed judgment would be lacking inasmuch as an issue would not have been categorically dealt with order is binding on the parties to the said order, but in our view, it cannot act as a precedent for subsequent cases such as the present one with which we are dealing.
10. If an order of this Court is brief and meant only for the purpose of closure of the controversy involved in a particular case and with a view to conclude the case, undoubtedly, such an order is binding on the parties to the said order, but in our view, it cannot act as a precedent for subsequent cases such as the present one with which we are dealing.
#Ratio_decidendi #stare_decisis
#Article_141 #Obiter_dicta
#concept
#Discernible_Topics
@CurrentLegalGK
π2β€1π1
πͺπRecusal Of Judges In India
"Independence and impartiality are the twin pillars without which justice cannot stand, and the purpose of recusal is to underpin themβ
π―Why Recusal Of Judgesβ
β’ Conflict of Interest.
β’ Nemo Judex In Causa Sua.
β’ Natural Justice
β’ Due Process of Law.
πWhat Does Recusal Meanββ
A judge can withdraw from hearing a case to prevent creating a perception that s/he carried a bias while deciding the case.
π Relevant Exampleπ―
When an appeal is filed in the Supreme Court against a judgement of a High Court that may have been delivered by the SC judge when she was in the HC or Re-examination of SC judgement by same judge.
π Legal Provisions and Case Laws
No Specific Provision but there are S.C. rulings.
1. Ranjit Thakur v UOI (1987)
Test of Reasonable Apprehension in the mind of the party.
βThe proper approach for the Judge is not to look at his own mind and ask himself, βAm I biasedββ but to look at the mind of the party before him,β
2. On 1997 S.C. adopted a Charter called the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life to serve as a guide to be observed by Judges, essential for independent, strong and respected judiciary, indispensable in the impartial administration of justice.
π¦Lacunas in the Recusal of Judges
β‘No codified rules which makes delay in proceedings.
β‘Judge is the Sole person to decide for himself and no other person but there should be 3rd party it can be the CJI/CJ/DJ or that court who refer the case to benches.
β‘It is Assumed that Judges are Unbiased due to the Oath given during Appointment.
β‘Lack of transparency; No reasoning is given when recuses.
Conclusion - This concept removes the doubts and brings confidence in Judiciary to the parties who are fighting for their life & liberty
π Pinochet Principle- If a judge is interested in a cause being promoted by one of the parties, then he is automatically disqualified from hearing viz If a High Court was consulted before the notification of the amendment, that disqualifies the entire High Court.
#Impartial_Judiciary #Independent_Judiciary
#Recusal_of_cases
#Article_14 #Article_21
#Discernible_Topics
@CurrentLegalGK
"Independence and impartiality are the twin pillars without which justice cannot stand, and the purpose of recusal is to underpin themβ
π―Why Recusal Of Judgesβ
β’ Conflict of Interest.
β’ Nemo Judex In Causa Sua.
β’ Natural Justice
β’ Due Process of Law.
πWhat Does Recusal Meanββ
A judge can withdraw from hearing a case to prevent creating a perception that s/he carried a bias while deciding the case.
π Relevant Exampleπ―
When an appeal is filed in the Supreme Court against a judgement of a High Court that may have been delivered by the SC judge when she was in the HC or Re-examination of SC judgement by same judge.
π Legal Provisions and Case Laws
No Specific Provision but there are S.C. rulings.
1. Ranjit Thakur v UOI (1987)
Test of Reasonable Apprehension in the mind of the party.
βThe proper approach for the Judge is not to look at his own mind and ask himself, βAm I biasedββ but to look at the mind of the party before him,β
2. On 1997 S.C. adopted a Charter called the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life to serve as a guide to be observed by Judges, essential for independent, strong and respected judiciary, indispensable in the impartial administration of justice.
π¦Lacunas in the Recusal of Judges
β‘No codified rules which makes delay in proceedings.
β‘Judge is the Sole person to decide for himself and no other person but there should be 3rd party it can be the CJI/CJ/DJ or that court who refer the case to benches.
β‘It is Assumed that Judges are Unbiased due to the Oath given during Appointment.
β‘Lack of transparency; No reasoning is given when recuses.
Conclusion - This concept removes the doubts and brings confidence in Judiciary to the parties who are fighting for their life & liberty
π Pinochet Principle- If a judge is interested in a cause being promoted by one of the parties, then he is automatically disqualified from hearing viz If a High Court was consulted before the notification of the amendment, that disqualifies the entire High Court.
#Impartial_Judiciary #Independent_Judiciary
#Recusal_of_cases
#Article_14 #Article_21
#Discernible_Topics
@CurrentLegalGK
π4π₯2β€1
RESTATEMENT OF VALUES OF JUDICIAL LIFE .pdf
1015.2 KB
Not exhaustive but 16 broad illustrations on expected Judge's life.
---->Restatement of values of judge's life 1997 SUPREME COURT
@CurrentLegalGK
---->Restatement of values of judge's life 1997 SUPREME COURT
@CurrentLegalGK
π±6
Default Bail as a Right of Accused
This type of bail is commonly referred as to as default Bail or compulsive bail, statutory bail or automatic bail as it granted on a/c of the default of the investigating agency is not completing the investigation within prescribed time, irrespective of the merits of the case .
It provides down that upon the expiry of a specified period, if the chargesheet has not been filed by the investigating agency, the accused immediately becomes entitled to seek bail.
Application has been made orally or in writing (but in daily proceedings the court requires in writing)
Default Bail u/s-167(2) is not mere statutory right but Fundamental Right also U/A- 21.
Default Bail is not matter of discretion but a matter of Rt. & it can ba availed by an accused irrespective of the gravity or nature of the offence.
Calculation of period of 90/60 days β
When does it start ? From the date of arrest or from the date of remand ? π€
Although in the most of the cases, day of arrest and remand are the same, but in still few cases, this situation may arise
"The total period of 90 days under Clause(i) and 60 days under Clause (ii) has to be calculated only from the date of remand & not from the of arrest"
Case - Ritu chhabaria V/s UOI 2023
#default_bail
#CRPC_167
#Article21
@CurrentLegalGK
What is default Bail ?πThis type of bail is commonly referred as to as default Bail or compulsive bail, statutory bail or automatic bail as it granted on a/c of the default of the investigating agency is not completing the investigation within prescribed time, irrespective of the merits of the case .
It provides down that upon the expiry of a specified period, if the chargesheet has not been filed by the investigating agency, the accused immediately becomes entitled to seek bail.
Application has been made orally or in writing (but in daily proceedings the court requires in writing)
Default Bail u/s-167(2) is not mere statutory right but Fundamental Right also U/A- 21.
Default Bail is not matter of discretion but a matter of Rt. & it can ba availed by an accused irrespective of the gravity or nature of the offence.
Default Bail U/Cr.pc is an imp. Rt. And it can't be scuttled by filing chargesheet before the probe is complete.Calculation of period of 90/60 days β
When does it start ? From the date of arrest or from the date of remand ? π€
Although in the most of the cases, day of arrest and remand are the same, but in still few cases, this situation may arise
dateCase - Ritu chhabaria V/s UOI 2023
#default_bail
#CRPC_167
#Article21
@CurrentLegalGK
π2π₯2
CPC 2023 6 MONTH DIGEST.pdf
1.3 MB
π2π₯2
Important case Judgement By SC by 3 Judges Bench
Challenged the Ritu Chabbaria Vs UOI Judgement
As per Chabbaria Judgement SC said default Bail is not mere statutory right but also fundamental right #Article21 .
A special bench of the Supreme Court has ordered today that trial courts and high courts across the country, while considering an application for the grant of default bail under section 167(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, shall decide the same independent of and without relying on the judgment of Ritu Chhabria vs. Union Of India & Ors.
Case - Directorate of Enforcement vs Manpreet Singh Talwar 2023
#default_bail
#crpc167
@CurrentLegalGK
Challenged the Ritu Chabbaria Vs UOI Judgement
As per Chabbaria Judgement SC said default Bail is not mere statutory right but also fundamental right #Article21 .
A special bench of the Supreme Court has ordered today that trial courts and high courts across the country, while considering an application for the grant of default bail under section 167(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, shall decide the same independent of and without relying on the judgment of Ritu Chhabria vs. Union Of India & Ors.
Recall of the judgment in Chhabaria which held that an investigating agency cannot file a charge sheet in court without completing a probe to deprive default bail to an accused.Case - Directorate of Enforcement vs Manpreet Singh Talwar 2023
#default_bail
#crpc167
@CurrentLegalGK
π5β€1β‘1
Lengthiest judgements
The main purpose of judgment writing is to convey the interpretation of the law as clearly as possible, not only to the parties in the litigation, but also to the people at large.
https://www.barandbench.com/columns/lengthy-judgments-unlimited-arguments
The main purpose of judgment writing is to convey the interpretation of the law as clearly as possible, not only to the parties in the litigation, but also to the people at large.
https://www.barandbench.com/columns/lengthy-judgments-unlimited-arguments
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
Lengthy judgments, unlimited arguments
βIt is the need of the hour to write clear and short judgments which the litigant can understand,β observed a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by J
π2
Legality of Lottery in India - Vakilsearch | Blog
https://vakilsearch.com/blog/legality-of-lottery-in-india/
β’ Wagering contracts
β‘In news - The controversy regarding game of skill and chance
Legal in Assam Arunachal Pradesh West Bengal Meghalaya Nagaland Mizoram Kerala Goa Maharashtra Manipur Madhya Pradesh Punjab Sikkim
https://vakilsearch.com/blog/legality-of-lottery-in-india/
β’ Wagering contracts
β‘In news - The controversy regarding game of skill and chance
Legal in Assam Arunachal Pradesh West Bengal Meghalaya Nagaland Mizoram Kerala Goa Maharashtra Manipur Madhya Pradesh Punjab Sikkim
Vakilsearch | Blog
Is Lottery Ticket Legal in India
The lottery ticket business is profitable in India. The government regulates it in unique way. We will discuss Is Lottery Legal in India.
π1
βοΈImportant changes in new bills.
BNS BNSS BSA
IPC CRPC IEA
Reference for Enforcement of bills ππ»
Read forensics under BSA it is clearly written that Infrastructure to be created within 5 years.
Why IPC WAS ENACTEDβ
Expansion of britishers lead to difficulties in administration particularly in the legal sphere βIndian law prior to codification consisted of a complex array of Parliamentary Charters and Acts, Indian legislation (after 1833), East India Company Regulations, English common law, Hindu law, Muslim law, and many bodies of customary law.,β
According to Barry Wright, βThe IPC project was delayed by governmental and legislative inertia, resistance by European residents to having the same legal status as indigenous populations.
Mention the limitations of this bill including what more could have been added in this major criminal amendment ππ»
@CurrentLegalGK
BNS BNSS BSA
IPC CRPC IEA
Reference for Enforcement of bills ππ»
Read forensics under BSA it is clearly written that Infrastructure to be created within 5 years.
Why IPC WAS ENACTEDβ
Expansion of britishers lead to difficulties in administration particularly in the legal sphere βIndian law prior to codification consisted of a complex array of Parliamentary Charters and Acts, Indian legislation (after 1833), East India Company Regulations, English common law, Hindu law, Muslim law, and many bodies of customary law.,β
According to Barry Wright, βThe IPC project was delayed by governmental and legislative inertia, resistance by European residents to having the same legal status as indigenous populations.
Mention the limitations of this bill including what more could have been added in this major criminal amendment ππ»
@CurrentLegalGK
π7π€1π―1π‘1
Recently 2 High courts gave landmark judgement over Changing the name comes under Fundamental Right
Case - Md. Sameer Rao vs St. Of U.P 2023
Another Judgement By Delhi High Court.
Right to identity is an 'intrinsic part' of the Right to life U/A-21 & that it includes the Right to have own's name / surname as per one's choice.
Case - Sadanand &Anr. Vs CBSE & ors. 2023
#fundamental_right
#A_14
#A_19
#A_21
@CurrentLegalGK
Right to change name is a F.R U/A-21
Right to keep or change one's name is vested in every citizen U/A- 19(1)(a)/21/14 & it can't be curtailed by any artitrary or unreasonable restrictions.Case - Md. Sameer Rao vs St. Of U.P 2023
Another Judgement By Delhi High Court.
Right to identity is an 'intrinsic part' of the Right to life U/A-21 & that it includes the Right to have own's name / surname as per one's choice.
Case - Sadanand &Anr. Vs CBSE & ors. 2023
#fundamental_right
#A_14
#A_19
#A_21
@CurrentLegalGK
π₯5β1
In the X v. Principal Secretary ruling, the Supreme Court made important observations on the reproductive autonomy of a woman. Women did not need to seek her familyβs consent, nor could doctors impose extra-legal conditions, the court said. The only cases in which a woman would require her guardianβs consent is if she is a minor or suffers from mental illness.
#MRTP #Abortion_rights
#MRTP #Abortion_rights
β€3π1π1
π¨ββοΈπ©ββοΈ
βοΈDeath and Life Sentences
1. Sarah Mathew v. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases:
(Sections 467 & 468)
Adopting a constructive and purposive interpretation, the constitutional bench held that in cases where the action was initiated well in time but cognisance was taken after limitation had expired, the person concerned should not be put to prejudice since the delay was a result of processes of the court. It was held that the benefit of limitation should always weigh in favour of the person concerned.
2. Shatrughan Chauhan & Anr v. UOI
The constitutional bench examined the five heads established for praying for commuting death sentences -delay, insanity, solitary confinement, judgments declared per incuriam (no more a precedent) and procedural lapses.
2. Anokhilal v. State of MP
Qualification of Amicus curiae
Where a death sentence could be an option, the court has to be very circumspect and cautious and not hasty. Reasonable time should be given to the amicus curiae to prepare for the plea and such amicus curiae should have at least 10 years standing in court in capital offences.
4. Muthuramalingam v State: The 5-judge bench held that in normal circumstances, 2 life imprisonment must run concurrently. This was yet another benefit conferred on life convicts.
5. Swamy Shraddananda vs Karnataka, it was held that in a case where a death sentence is awarded and but the court finds the case does not warrant death sentence and at the same time mere award of life imprisonment would not be sufficient, the court may award a life sentence with a rider that the executive shall not exercise the power of commutation or remission for a fixed period of 20-25 years whatever the court decides.
βοΈSubstantive Challenges against Certain IPC Provisions
6. In Navtej Singh Johar v UOI, a constitutional bench held that Section 377 would not be a valid provision. As such, same-sex relationships entered into by individuals would not invite criminal action under Section 377 and they cannot be proceeded against. This was a significant development in the last decade.
7. Mukesh Singh vs. State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi)
A trial won't be vitiated only because the informant and I.O. are same unless the defence counsel is able to show biasness or malafide on the part of the I.O. This case had overruled Mohanlal's judgment which had taken a contrary view.
8. Arup Bhuyan v State of Assam: It was held that mere membership of a banned organisation alone can be a factor to launch an investigation into the matter and that such membership can invite prosecution even if no act had been committed by such person in furtherance of the elements which constituted the crime in question.
9. Kapil Wadhawan case: The bench held that the day the remand order was issued by the court should be considered while calculating the period of 60 days or 90 days under Section 167 of CrPC.
#CRPC #CAPITAL_PUNISHMENT #IPC #UAPA #NDPS
@CurrentLegalGK
Landmark judgements on criminal LawsβοΈDeath and Life Sentences
1. Sarah Mathew v. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases:
(Sections 467 & 468)
Adopting a constructive and purposive interpretation, the constitutional bench held that in cases where the action was initiated well in time but cognisance was taken after limitation had expired, the person concerned should not be put to prejudice since the delay was a result of processes of the court. It was held that the benefit of limitation should always weigh in favour of the person concerned.
2. Shatrughan Chauhan & Anr v. UOI
The constitutional bench examined the five heads established for praying for commuting death sentences -delay, insanity, solitary confinement, judgments declared per incuriam (no more a precedent) and procedural lapses.
2. Anokhilal v. State of MP
Qualification of Amicus curiae
Where a death sentence could be an option, the court has to be very circumspect and cautious and not hasty. Reasonable time should be given to the amicus curiae to prepare for the plea and such amicus curiae should have at least 10 years standing in court in capital offences.
4. Muthuramalingam v State: The 5-judge bench held that in normal circumstances, 2 life imprisonment must run concurrently. This was yet another benefit conferred on life convicts.
5. Swamy Shraddananda vs Karnataka, it was held that in a case where a death sentence is awarded and but the court finds the case does not warrant death sentence and at the same time mere award of life imprisonment would not be sufficient, the court may award a life sentence with a rider that the executive shall not exercise the power of commutation or remission for a fixed period of 20-25 years whatever the court decides.
βοΈSubstantive Challenges against Certain IPC Provisions
6. In Navtej Singh Johar v UOI, a constitutional bench held that Section 377 would not be a valid provision. As such, same-sex relationships entered into by individuals would not invite criminal action under Section 377 and they cannot be proceeded against. This was a significant development in the last decade.
7. Mukesh Singh vs. State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi)
A trial won't be vitiated only because the informant and I.O. are same unless the defence counsel is able to show biasness or malafide on the part of the I.O. This case had overruled Mohanlal's judgment which had taken a contrary view.
8. Arup Bhuyan v State of Assam: It was held that mere membership of a banned organisation alone can be a factor to launch an investigation into the matter and that such membership can invite prosecution even if no act had been committed by such person in furtherance of the elements which constituted the crime in question.
9. Kapil Wadhawan case: The bench held that the day the remand order was issued by the court should be considered while calculating the period of 60 days or 90 days under Section 167 of CrPC.
#CRPC #CAPITAL_PUNISHMENT #IPC #UAPA #NDPS
@CurrentLegalGK
π9β€βπ₯2β2π€©1
π¦π
The main purpose of judgment writing is to convey the interpretation of the law as clearly as possible, not only to the parties in the litigation, but also to the people at large.
βοΈLong Indian Judgements
Notably, the verdict in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) that propounded the Basic Structure Doctrine contained 700 pages and was difficult to comprehend. The SP Gupta case (1981) that had roughly 830 pages. However, during the last few years, the Supreme Court of India has broken its own record of writing the longest verdict. It seems there is a competition among the judges to make new records in terms of writing long judgments. The NJAC judgment (2015) had 1042 pages; the Aadhaar judgment (2018) in the Puttaswamy case had 1,448 pages; the Ayodhya judgment had 1,045 pages.
βοΈForeign judgements' length
Even the judgments of the Supreme Courts of UK and USA, which Indian judges are very fond of, do teach a lesson. The verdict in the Parliament Prorogation case (2019) by the UK Supreme Court had only 24 pages. The Marbury v. Madison case (1803) that explained the doctrine of judicial review had just 18 pages. The leading Texas v. Johnson (1989) on free speech in the context of the right to burn the American flag had just 43 pages. The judgment in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) that decriminalized sodomy in the State of Texas had only 49 pages, unlike Indian judges who used 493 pages to deal with similar questions in the Navtej Singh Johar case (2018). Another landmark decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) dealing with abortion rights used just 66 pages to communicate the law.
Reasons of long judgements are different opinions/tests/doctrines that every judge applies even when concurring the same opinion as that of his/her colleague.
The era is of fast paced world where even legal associates need crisp information and it is pertinent to note that the law (Article 141) is for people itself if legal associates are facing difficulty in comprehension and the judgements are creating confusion how can we expect the people to remember the maxim
Justice HR Khanna rightly said that the function of a judge while deciding a case is not the same as that of a research scholar.
#legal_fact #lenghtiest_judgements
#law_for_people
Lengthiest Judgements By Supreme CourtsThe main purpose of judgment writing is to convey the interpretation of the law as clearly as possible, not only to the parties in the litigation, but also to the people at large.
βοΈLong Indian Judgements
Notably, the verdict in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) that propounded the Basic Structure Doctrine contained 700 pages and was difficult to comprehend. The SP Gupta case (1981) that had roughly 830 pages. However, during the last few years, the Supreme Court of India has broken its own record of writing the longest verdict. It seems there is a competition among the judges to make new records in terms of writing long judgments. The NJAC judgment (2015) had 1042 pages; the Aadhaar judgment (2018) in the Puttaswamy case had 1,448 pages; the Ayodhya judgment had 1,045 pages.
βοΈForeign judgements' length
Even the judgments of the Supreme Courts of UK and USA, which Indian judges are very fond of, do teach a lesson. The verdict in the Parliament Prorogation case (2019) by the UK Supreme Court had only 24 pages. The Marbury v. Madison case (1803) that explained the doctrine of judicial review had just 18 pages. The leading Texas v. Johnson (1989) on free speech in the context of the right to burn the American flag had just 43 pages. The judgment in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) that decriminalized sodomy in the State of Texas had only 49 pages, unlike Indian judges who used 493 pages to deal with similar questions in the Navtej Singh Johar case (2018). Another landmark decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) dealing with abortion rights used just 66 pages to communicate the law.
Reasons of long judgements are different opinions/tests/doctrines that every judge applies even when concurring the same opinion as that of his/her colleague.
The era is of fast paced world where even legal associates need crisp information and it is pertinent to note that the law (Article 141) is for people itself if legal associates are facing difficulty in comprehension and the judgements are creating confusion how can we expect the people to remember the maxim
"Ignorantia Juris Non Excusat".Justice HR Khanna rightly said that the function of a judge while deciding a case is not the same as that of a research scholar.
#legal_fact #lenghtiest_judgements
#law_for_people
π11