BREAKING| Death Sentence Can Be Challenged In Article 32 Petition For Breach Of Procedural Safeguards: Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/death-sentence-can-be-challenged-in-article-32-petition-for-breach-of-procedural-safeguards-supreme-court-301845
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/death-sentence-can-be-challenged-in-article-32-petition-for-breach-of-procedural-safeguards-supreme-court-301845
www.livelaw.in
Death Sentence Can Be Challenged In Article 32 Petition For Breach Of Procedural Safeguards: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today allowed an Article 32 petition filed by Vasanta Sampat Dupare, a man conv
π1
#Question@CurrentLegalGK
Can you answer?
Is it possible to access the remedy of injunction in case criminal defamation?
Question by one member.
Can you answer?
Is it possible to access the remedy of injunction in case criminal defamation?
Question by one member.
36970_2012_Judgement_09-May-2018.pdf
1.7 MB
Kalpana mehta v union of India
It concluded that while parliamentary debates and reports may aid in interpreting laws, they should not be treated as binding evidence in court cases
Section 57(4)/ 52 BSA and 74/74 BSA
judicial review v judicial overreach.
There is no strait-jacket
formula for determining what constitutes judicial restraint and
judicial progressionism. Sometimes, there is necessity for the
Courts to conceptualise a path that can be a wise middle path.
The middle course between these two views is the concept of
judicial engagement so that the concept of judicial restraint does
not take the colour of judicial abdication or judicial passivism.
Judicial engagement requires that the Courts maintain their
constitutional obligation to remain the sentinel on qui vive.
#IOS@CurrentLegalGK
It concluded that while parliamentary debates and reports may aid in interpreting laws, they should not be treated as binding evidence in court cases
Section 57(4)/ 52 BSA and 74/74 BSA
judicial review v judicial overreach.
There is no strait-jacket
formula for determining what constitutes judicial restraint and
judicial progressionism. Sometimes, there is necessity for the
Courts to conceptualise a path that can be a wise middle path.
The middle course between these two views is the concept of
judicial engagement so that the concept of judicial restraint does
not take the colour of judicial abdication or judicial passivism.
Judicial engagement requires that the Courts maintain their
constitutional obligation to remain the sentinel on qui vive.
#IOS@CurrentLegalGK
β€4
510-manoj-v-state-of-madhya-pradesh-20-may-2022-418773.pdf
2.1 MB
Manoj v State of MP 2022Guidelines
Para 213 to 217
There is urgent need to ensure that mitigating circumstances are considered at the trial stage, to avoid slipping into a retributive response to the brutality of the crime, as is
noticeably the situation in a majority of cases reaching the appellate stage.
The strength of βprecedentβ and βconsistencyβ is perhaps, therefore, lowest when it
comes to matters of sentencing, as long as it is within the confines of legality and resulting
in βprincipled sentencingβ.
Death penalty 235(2) crpc sentence hearing.
#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK
β€4β€βπ₯1
ππΌπΎπΈπ βπββπΌβπ πΈπ½π½πΈπβπ πΉπͺ- βππ₯π¦π£ππ ππ¦π€π₯πππ β’
BREAKING| Death Sentence Can Be Challenged In Article 32 Petition For Breach Of Procedural Safeguards: Supreme Court https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/death-sentence-can-be-challenged-in-article-32-petition-for-breach-of-procedural-safeguards-supreme-courtβ¦
"The writ petition is allowed. Therefore, we hold that Article 32 of the Constitution empowers this Court in cases related to capital punishment to reopen the sentencing stage where the accused has been condemned to death penalty without ensuring that the guidelines mandated in Manoj was followed. This corrective power is invoked precisely to compel rigorous application of the safeguards laid down in Manoj v. MP 2022 SC judgment in such cases, thereby ensuring that the condemned person is not deprived of the fundamental rights to equal treatment, individualized sentencing and fair procedure that Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution secure to every person.
We
. Article 32 of the Constitution is the bedrock of constitutional remedies but its exceptional scope cannot be permitted to become a routine pathway for reopening concluded matters. Reopening will be reserved for only those cases where there is a clear, specific breach of the new procedural safeguards, as these breaches are so serious that if left uncorrected, they would undermine the accused person's basic rights like dignity and fair process" observed the Court
@CurrentLegalGK
We
however add a word of caution
. Article 32 of the Constitution is the bedrock of constitutional remedies but its exceptional scope cannot be permitted to become a routine pathway for reopening concluded matters. Reopening will be reserved for only those cases where there is a clear, specific breach of the new procedural safeguards, as these breaches are so serious that if left uncorrected, they would undermine the accused person's basic rights like dignity and fair process" observed the Court
@CurrentLegalGK
β€2π1
DOC-20250814-WA0005..pdf
196.8 KB
Constitutional Morality.
Grote, Ambedkar, Kesavanand bharti (2 judges), naz foundation v NCT delhi 2009, navtej singh johar, sabrimala, manoj narula.
@CurrentLegalGK
Grote, Ambedkar, Kesavanand bharti (2 judges), naz foundation v NCT delhi 2009, navtej singh johar, sabrimala, manoj narula.
This Court has always been guided by constitutional morality and not by social morality. (Navtej) 2018
@CurrentLegalGK
β€2π1
DOC-20250814-WA0007..pdf
217.5 KB
β€3π―1
Mere Non-Signing Won't Invalidate Arbitration Agreement If Parties Otherwise Consented To Arbitration : Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/mere-non-signing-wont-invalidate-arbitration-agreement-if-parties-otherwise-consented-to-arbitration-supreme-court-301969
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/mere-non-signing-wont-invalidate-arbitration-agreement-if-parties-otherwise-consented-to-arbitration-supreme-court-301969
www.livelaw.in
Mere Non-Signing Won't Invalidate Arbitration Agreement If Parties Otherwise Consented To Arbitration : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court observed that merely because an arbitration agreement was not signed, there is no bar to refer the dispute to arbitration, if the parties have otherwise consented to...
β€1
Refusal To Enter Witness Box By Party Having Special Knowledge Of Facts Invites Adverse Inference : Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/refusal-to-enter-witness-box-by-party-having-special-knowledge-of-facts-invites-adverse-inference-supreme-court-301963
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/refusal-to-enter-witness-box-by-party-having-special-knowledge-of-facts-invites-adverse-inference-supreme-court-301963
www.livelaw.in
Refusal To Enter Witness Box By Party Having Special Knowledge Of Facts Invites Adverse Inference : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (Aug. 25) observed that when certain facts lie exclusively within a party's personal knowledge, the failure to enter the witness box to testify on those facts can lead...
β€1
Non-Discovery Of Incriminating Material Does Not Mean Non-Cooperation By Accused: Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-mere-non-discovery-of-incriminating-material-does-not-mean-there-was-non-cooperation-by-accused-301954
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-mere-non-discovery-of-incriminating-material-does-not-mean-there-was-non-cooperation-by-accused-301954
www.livelaw.in
Non-Discovery Of Incriminating Material Does Not Mean Non-Cooperation By Accused: Supreme Court
While granting anticipatory bail to an accused, the Supreme Court recently observed that mere non-discovery of incriminating material is not an indicator of non-cooperation on the part of the...
How Bal Gangadhar Tilak made the worship of Lord Ganesh a grand community festival π
#bal_gangadhar_tilak #express_explained #ganesh_chaturthi_festival
#bal_gangadhar_tilak #express_explained #ganesh_chaturthi_festival
The Indian Express
How Bal Gangadhar Tilak made the worship of Lord Ganesh a grand community festival
The year was 1893, and Lokmanya, the great patriot, was looking for ways to unite and mobilise Hindu society against colonial rule. He sought to leverage practices rooted in Indian culture and suffused with Hindu symbolism. But he has also been criticisedβ¦
β€βπ₯5β€1
Ayurveda Day to be observed on a fixed date on 23 September - The Statesman
https://www.thestatesman.com/india/ayurveda-day-to-be-observed-on-a-fixed-date-on-23-september-1503477034.html
https://www.thestatesman.com/india/ayurveda-day-to-be-observed-on-a-fixed-date-on-23-september-1503477034.html
The Statesman
Ayurveda Day to be observed on a fixed date on 23 September - The Statesman
The decision to assign a fixed date marks a historic shift, giving Ayurveda a universal calendar identity and enabling greater participation at the global level.
π6β€1
ππΌπΎπΈπ βπββπΌβπ πΈπ½π½πΈπβπ πΉπͺ- βππ₯π¦π£ππ ππ¦π€π₯πππ β’
Ayurveda Day to be observed on a fixed date on 23 September - The Statesman https://www.thestatesman.com/india/ayurveda-day-to-be-observed-on-a-fixed-date-on-23-september-1503477034.html
Earlier, Ayurveda Day was celebrated on Dhanvantari Jayanti (Dhanteras). The decision to assign a fixed date marks a historic shift, giving Ayurveda a universal calendar identity and enabling greater participation at the global level.
Announcing the theme for this yearβs celebration β βAyurveda for People & Planetβ, Union Minister for Ayush Prataprao Jadhav said,
@CurrentLegalGK
Announcing the theme for this yearβs celebration β βAyurveda for People & Planetβ, Union Minister for Ayush Prataprao Jadhav said,
@CurrentLegalGK
β€4π1
Can't Curtail Right To Education: MP High Court Allows 'Extraordinary' 11-Yr-Old's Provisional Admission To Class 9 Despite Being 'Underage'
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madhya-pradesh-high-court/madhya-pradesh-high-court-nep-right-to-education-301827
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madhya-pradesh-high-court/madhya-pradesh-high-court-nep-right-to-education-301827
www.livelaw.in
Right To Education Can't Be Curtailed: MP High Court Allows 'Extraordinary' 11-Year-Old's Provisional Admission To Class 9 Despiteβ¦
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reiterated that the fundamental right to education envisioned u
ππΌπΎπΈπ βπββπΌβπ πΈπ½π½πΈπβπ πΉπͺ- βππ₯π¦π£ππ ππ¦π€π₯πππ β’
Can't Curtail Right To Education: MP High Court Allows 'Extraordinary' 11-Yr-Old's Provisional Admission To Class 9 Despite Being 'Underage' https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madhya-pradesh-high-court/madhya-pradesh-high-court-nep-right-to-education-301827
Prodigy's Fundamental Right to Education Article 21A.
AARAV SINGH v. UoI 2025
@CurrentLegalGK
Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides Right to Education. Right to Education cannot be curtailed by imposing a condition regarding age limit. There are several instances which point out that if an underage child can perform exceptional qualities of such student/candidates cannot be suppressed or overlooked merely on the ground of he being underage".
AARAV SINGH v. UoI 2025
@CurrentLegalGK
π3
π§Ύ
The examination shall include the
following subjects and any enactment forming part of the syllabus shall include its 'substituted' enactment
It is similar to section 8 general clauses act, 1897.
Eg. Arbitration Act conciliation chapter ---> Mediation Act.
Eg. IPC----> BNS.
@CurrentLegalGK
CHANGE IN UTTAR PRADESH JUDICIAL SERVICE SYLLABUS The examination shall include the
following subjects and any enactment forming part of the syllabus shall include its 'substituted' enactment
It is similar to section 8 general clauses act, 1897.
Eg. Arbitration Act conciliation chapter ---> Mediation Act.
Eg. IPC----> BNS.
@CurrentLegalGK
β€4π1π1
ππΌπΎπΈπ βπββπΌβπ πΈπ½π½πΈπβπ πΉπͺ- βππ₯π¦π£ππ ππ¦π€π₯πππ β’
π§Ύ CHANGE IN UTTAR PRADESH JUDICIAL SERVICE SYLLABUS The examination shall include the following subjects and any enactment forming part of the syllabus shall include its 'substituted' enactment It is similar to section 8 general clauses act, 1897. Eg.β¦
For clarification If they write in the annexure that IPC CRPC IEA will come then in addition to them new laws will also come.
It depends upon syllabus but prima facie it looks new laws will only be there ( see APO) ,let's wait for syllabus.
It depends upon syllabus but prima facie it looks new laws will only be there ( see APO) ,let's wait for syllabus.
π2β€1
Criminal Courts Cannot Recall Or Review Their Own Judgments Except For Clerical Or Arithmetical Errors: Supreme Court Reiterates
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/criminal-courts-cannot-recall-or-review-their-own-judgments-except-for-clerical-or-arithmetical-errors-supreme-court-reiterates-302131
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/criminal-courts-cannot-recall-or-review-their-own-judgments-except-for-clerical-or-arithmetical-errors-supreme-court-reiterates-302131
www.livelaw.in
Criminal Courts Cannot Recall Or Review Their Own Judgments Except For Clerical Or Arithmetical Errors: Supreme Court Reiterates
The Supreme Court recently ruled that criminal courts cannot review or recall their judgments except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors, while setting aside a Delhi High Court order that...
π1
ππΌπΎπΈπ βπββπΌβπ πΈπ½π½πΈπβπ πΉπͺ- βππ₯π¦π£ππ ππ¦π€π₯πππ β’
Criminal Courts Cannot Recall Or Review Their Own Judgments Except For Clerical Or Arithmetical Errors: Supreme Court Reiterates https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/criminal-courts-cannot-recall-or-review-their-own-judgments-except-for-clerical-or-arithmeticalβ¦
π
βthe criminal courts, as envisaged under the CrPC, are barred from altering or review their own judgments except for the exceptions which are explicitly provided by the statute, namely, correction of a clerical or an arithmetical error that might have been committed or the said power is provided under any other law for the time being in force. As the courts become functus officio the very moment a judgment or an order is signed, the bar of Section 362 CrPC becomes applicable, this, despite the powers provided under Section 482 CrPC which, this veil cannot allow the courts to step beyond or circumvent an explicit barβ
Court culled out the following exceptional circumstances wherein a criminal court is empowered to alter or review its own judgment or a final order under Section 362 CrPC:
"a. Such power is expressly conferred upon court by CrPC or any other law for the time being in force or;
b. The court passing such a judgement or order lacked inherent jurisdiction to do so or;
c. A fraud or collusion is being played on court to obtain such judgment or order or;
d. A mistake on the part of court caused prejudice to a party or;
e. Fact relating to non-serving of necessary party or death leading to estate being non-represented, not brought to notice of court while passing such judgment or order."
528 BNSS and 403 BNSS
482 CrPC and 362 CrPC.
#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK
When can criminal courts review its own judgment and orders and doctrine of functus officio.Generally
βthe criminal courts, as envisaged under the CrPC, are barred from altering or review their own judgments except for the exceptions which are explicitly provided by the statute, namely, correction of a clerical or an arithmetical error that might have been committed or the said power is provided under any other law for the time being in force. As the courts become functus officio the very moment a judgment or an order is signed, the bar of Section 362 CrPC becomes applicable, this, despite the powers provided under Section 482 CrPC which, this veil cannot allow the courts to step beyond or circumvent an explicit barβ
Exceptionally
Court culled out the following exceptional circumstances wherein a criminal court is empowered to alter or review its own judgment or a final order under Section 362 CrPC:
"a. Such power is expressly conferred upon court by CrPC or any other law for the time being in force or;
b. The court passing such a judgement or order lacked inherent jurisdiction to do so or;
c. A fraud or collusion is being played on court to obtain such judgment or order or;
d. A mistake on the part of court caused prejudice to a party or;
e. Fact relating to non-serving of necessary party or death leading to estate being non-represented, not brought to notice of court while passing such judgment or order."
Vikram Bakshi v. R.P. Khosla 2025
528 BNSS and 403 BNSS
482 CrPC and 362 CrPC.
#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK
β€2π2