read with
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/4706

Also Which law says that even the picture dicta of supreme court is binding on all courts exercising itself.

#Question@CurrentLegalGK

[Section 223 BNSS] Notice Should Not Be Issued To Prospective Accused Before Taking Cognizance Of Offence: Kerala High Court
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/kerala-high-court/kerala-high-court-section-223-cognizance-offence-magistrate-hearing-accused-282428

Capital Punishment An Exception; Even In Cases Of Multiple Murders, Avoid Death Sentence If There's Possibility Of Reform : Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/capital-punishment-an-exception-even-in-cases-of-multiple-murders-avoid-death-sentence-if-theres-possibility-of-reform-supreme-court-282400

Sixty Days or Ninety Days -- The Confusion Continues
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/right-to-default-bail-under-bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita-282457

This is just an article for critical analysis of this judgement.

you can see the post for judgment to get clarity
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/4640

'Not Everything Said In A Judgment Constitutes A Precedent' : Supreme Court Explains Distinction Between Obiter Dicta & Ratio Decidendi
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-obiter-dicta-ratio-decidendi-distinction-career-institute-educational-society-vs-om-shree-thakurji-educational-society-227739

Ratio decidendi v obiter dicta Explained


1. “The inversion test” (Effect of removing that law point) to identify what is ratio decidendi in a judgment. To test whether a particular proposition of law is to be treated as the ratio decidendi of the case, the proposition is to be inversed, i.e. to remove from the text of the judgment as if it did not exist. If the conclusion of the case would still have been the same even without examining the proposition, then it cannot be regarded as the ratio decidendi of the case.

2. Fact and conclusions not precedent-
It is not the findings of material facts, direct and inferential, but the statements of the principles of law applicable to the legal problems disclosed by the facts, which is the vital element in the decision and operates as a precedent. Even the conclusion does not operate as a precedent, albeit operates as res judicata. Thus, it is not everything said by a Judge when giving judgment that constitutes a precedent. The only thing in a Judge's decision binding as a legal precedent is the principle upon which the case is decided and, for this reason, it is important to analyse a decision and isolate from it the obiter dicta

@CurrentLegalGK

#Essay@CurrentLegalGK

🫂1. Social-
"Productivity vs. Employee Welfare: The Dilemma of Long Working Hours"
OR
Age restriction on social Media, A Good or Bad Move for Growth?

👨‍⚖️ 2. Legal-
Live-In Relationships: Navigating Tradition and Individual Rights in India"

How Uttarakhand UCC regulates live-in relationships 🔗
#explained_law #express_explained #live_in_relationship #uniform_civil_code #uttarakhand

Why Himachal Pradesh could soon allow controlled cannabis cultivation 🔗
#cannabis #express_explained #narcotic_drugs_and_psychotropic_substances_(ndps)_act

#Fact@CurrentLegalGK

Most Favourite Poison used for Homicide.

👇Comment

@CurrentLegalGK

[Section 223 BNSS] Notice Of Hearing Can Be Issued To Prospective Accused Only After Examining Complainant And Witnesses: Kerala High Court
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/kerala-high-court/kerala-high-court-bnss-section-223-cognizance-offence-magistrate-hearing-accused-282428

👨‍⚖️ Nothing New only purpose of 223 1st proviso is mentioned

Court stated that hearing of accused is made mandatory under Section 223 (1) of the BNSS so that the Magistrate could decide whether or not to take cognizance. It said, 💭 “Presumably, the purpose behind the proviso is to provide an opportunity to the Magistrate to assimilate the correct facts, for deciding whether or not to take cognizance of the offence.”


🤔 Term Cognizance not defined, apex court decision relied upon S.K.Sinha, Chief Enforcement Officer v. Videocon International Ltd. and Others (2008),
the Court stated that taking cognisance of an offence occurs when Magistrate takes judicial notice of an offence for initiating proceedings. It stated that once cognizance of an offence is taken, then the Magistrate has to decide whether to issue process to the accused or not.

✨ Case:
Suby Antony v R1 (Deleted), 2025

✨ 223 BNSS

Explained| Ad Hoc Judges In High Courts : Procedure For Appointment & Tenure
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/explained-ad-hoc-judges-in-high-courts-procedure-for-appointment-tenure-282507

This MEMO is the detailed process for appointment of Supreme court and High court judges.

It has No force of Law because of an adminstrative decision

✨ Case: Lok Prahari through its General Secretary V N Shukla IAS (Retd) vs Union of India 2021

Memorandum of procedure of appointment of Supreme Court Judges | Department of Justice | India
https://doj.gov.in/memorandum-of-procedure-of-appointment-of-supreme-court-judges/

High Court
https://doj.gov.in/memorandum-of-procedure-of-appointment-of-high-court-judges/


✨✨ Steps Involved in Procedure (not a law)

Supreme Court collegium is not involved in the appointment of ad hoc judges.

The Chief Justice of the concerned High Court
1. Takes consent of the retired judge.
2. CJ then informs the Chief Minister of the State about the recommended name and period of appointment.
3. the Chief Minister forwards the recommendation to the Governor
4. Governor communicates the same to the Union Minister of Law and Justice;
5. The Union Law Minister in turn consults the CJI for his advise. 
6. Advice and recommendation are then sent to the Prime Minister who renders advice to the President of India.
7. Recommendations are confirmed upon the official consent of the President.
8. Followed by official notification in the Gazette of India by the Chief Minister of the State.

✨ Under What Circumstances 224A is invoked? Same 2021 lok prahari case

a. If the vacancies are more than 20% of the sanctioned strength. (not a basis now)

b. The cases in a particular category are pending for over five years.

c. More than 10% of the backlog of pending cases are over five years old.

d. The percentage of the rate of disposal is lower than the institution of the cases either in a particular subject matter or generally in the Court.

 e. Even if there are not many old cases pending, but depending on the jurisdiction, a situation of mounting arrears is likely to arise if the rate of disposal is consistently lower than the rate of filing over a period of a year or more.

✨✨ Recent Order (law under article 141, you can mention them but not Memorandum of appointment also aforesaid point (b) to (e) are also law under 2021 case)

1. However, as per the today's order of the bench led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna, condition (a) has been kept in abeyance.

2. Total 2-5 Judges can be appointed but shall not exceed 10% of total strength.

3. Salary same as permanent judges.


✨ Summary—
✅ Memorandum of procedure was 1st made in 1999 and evolved as per all 3 judges case.

✅ Lok Prahari through its general secretary VN shukla v. UoI, 2021 Elaborative guidelines on appointment which is a law on 224A.
✅ 2025 Order relaxing 20% vacancy rule (a) of lok prahari.

@CurrentLegalGK

✨ Prison Reforms SC
Complete material for an Essay, knowledge of current situation.

@CurrentLegalGK

Offence not committed in ‘public view’: Why Bombay HC quashed SC/ST Act case 🔗
#explained_law #express_explained #sc/st #scheduled_castes_and_scheduled_tribes_(prevention_of_atrocities_act)

public view v. public place

🤔 APO, RJS, CG, Gujarat or Himachal Judiciary?

WHICH EXAM RU PREFERRING?

@CurrentLegalGK

THE MAJORITY ACT, 1875 (as on 1999 amendment)

1. The word "Indian" Removed.
2. The age is only 18 years, no 21/18.
3. Important Amendment of 1999.

Is a general law applicable everywhere.


✅ New Section 3
3. Age of majority of persons domiciled in India.—
(1) Every person domiciled in India shall attain the age of majority on his completing the age of eighteen years and not before.
(2) In computing the age of any person, the day on which he was born is to be included as a whole day and he shall be deemed to have attained majority at the beginning of the eighteenth anniversary of
that day

❌ Old Section 3
1. Contained 2 Ages
2. Mentioning of Guardian and succession acts.
3. No clarification whether the day on which he/she born will be counted or not.

💭💬 Examples where this can be used—
A. Section 7 of Transfer of property act
B. Section 11 of Transfer of property act

C,D.... Mention below 👇
@CurrentLegalGK