𝕃𝔼𝔾𝔸𝕃 β„‚π•Œβ„β„π”Όβ„•π•‹ π”Έπ”½π”½π”Έπ•€β„π•Š 𝔹π•ͺ- ℕ𝕒π•₯𝕦𝕣𝕒𝕝 𝕁𝕦𝕀π•₯π•šπ•”π•– β„’
18.9K subscribers
851 photos
11 videos
1.72K files
3.09K links
πŸ“² Contact β†’ @CurrentLegalGKBOT

☺️ 360° Cases on topics.

Keywords: Civil Judge, MPCJ, UP PSCJ, Haryana ADA, DJS, CBI APP, RJS, JLO, CLAT PG, Supreme Court law clerk, AIBE, IBPS, UGC NET.
_____________
🧠 Daily Quiz β†’ @LegalQuizzes

β³πŸš€ Enjoy Learning!
Download Telegram
2025_livelaw_sc_169_vihaan_kumar_v_state_of_haryana_7_feb_2025_611210.pdf
451.8 KB
Grounds of arrest in writing to accused as well as relative to make Article 22 meaningful

Hence, the requirement of communicating the grounds
of arrest in writing is not only to the arrested person, but also to the friends, relatives or such other person as may be disclosed or nominated by the arrested person, so as to make the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution meaningful and effective failing which, such arrest may be rendered illegal

2. Arrest illegal if Groumds not provided.

VIHAAN KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA 2025
πŸ‘4❀2
2025_livelaw_sc_628_kasireddy_upender_reddy_v_state_of_andhra_pradesh.pdf
593.8 KB
KASIREDDY UPENDER REDDY v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

If a person is arrested on a warrant, the grounds for reasons for the arrest is the warrant itself; if the warrant is read over to him, that is sufficient compliance with the requirement that he should be informed of the grounds for his arrest.

Reasons for arrest v Grounds for arrest (Prabir Purkayastha v. State, 2024)

#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK SECTION 47
πŸ‘4❀2
MIHIR RAJESH SHAH v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA SLP(Crl) No. 17132/2024

Pending....

"The question that we are called upon to answer is as to whether in each and every case, even arising out of IPC, would it be necessary to furnish grounds of arrest to accused either before arrest or forthwith after arrest? Another question we are required to consider is, in exceptional cases, on account of exigencies, if it is not possible to furnish grounds of arrest either before or immediately after arrest, whether even in such cases the arrest is vitiated on account of non-compliance with Section 50 CrPC

#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK
𝕃𝔼𝔾𝔸𝕃 β„‚π•Œβ„β„π”Όβ„•π•‹ π”Έπ”½π”½π”Έπ•€β„π•Š 𝔹π•ͺ- ℕ𝕒π•₯𝕦𝕣𝕒𝕝 𝕁𝕦𝕀π•₯π•šπ•”π•– β„’
'BNSS Removed Discriminatory Provision' : Supreme Court Closes Challenge To CrPC Section Which Says Only Male Family Members Can Accept Summons https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/bnss-removed-discriminatory-provision-supreme-court-closes-challenge-to-crpc…
So even if a law is still in force and a substitute law has remedied the invalidity then no petition can be entertained for making earlier invalid provision invalid which is still applicable.

The Writ Petition under Article 32 challenged the constitutional validity of Section 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 on the ground that it was discriminatory against women by disabling them from accepting summons on behalf of the persons summoned.

3. Parliament, while enacting the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has incorporated the provisions of Section 66 which addresses the grievance.

KUSH KALRA V. UOI 2024


dismissed petition

#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK
❀4πŸ‘1
🟰 Mohammed Abdul Wahid v. Nilofer 2021

The Apex Court, through Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, held that β€œwitness and parties to a suit, for the purposes of adducing evidence, either documentary or oral are on the same footing.”

Accordingly, (i) there is no distinction carved out by the provisions of the CPC between a β€˜party to a suit as a witness’ and β€˜a witness simpliciter’; and (ii) documents may be produced to confront both a β€˜party to a suit’ and β€˜witness in a civil trial’ at the stage of cross-examination.

https://disputeresolution.cyrilamarchandblogs.com/2024/01/party-and-witness-on-an-equal-footing-for-the-purpose-of-adducing-evidence-in-civil-suit-supreme-court-clarifies/#_ftn1

#BSA@CurrentLegalGK
1405920211946876order12-sep-2023-492294.pdf
122.7 KB
The enactment of a new law will not obviate the need to adjudicate upon the constitutional validity of Section 124A for the simple reason that any new legislation of a penal character cannot have retrospective effect.

See the stark conflict
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/6827

The only difference is that of procedural and substantive law.

@CurrentLegalGK
❀1πŸ’―1
#BSA@CurrentLegalGK
#MCQ@CurrentLegalGK

A, an accomplice, gives an account of a robbery in which he took part. He also narrates certain incidents unconnected with the robbery that happened on his way to and from the scene of crime. Which of the following statements is correct regarding the admissibility of such evidence?

(a) Independent evidence of these incidents is irrelevant, as they are not directly connected with the robbery

(b) Independent evidence of these incidents may be admitted to corroborate A's testimony regarding the robbery

(c) Independent evidence of these incidents is admissible only if A is not an accomplice

(d) Independent evidence of these incidents are conclusive proof of the robbery


CITE RELEVANT PROVISIONS
❀5
πŸŒ•πŸŒ– Lunar Eclipse | Peak of Blood Moon.

Of course camera could not justify it due to cloudy weather, the colour was really Red.

Today, Learnt the lunar rising point cycles.

πŸ‘€Myth busted: Unlike Solar eclipse, you can watch Lunar eclipse with Naked Eyes.

Astrophysics is always Amazing 🀩


@CurrentLegalGK
❀‍πŸ”₯5⚑3πŸ”₯2❀1