Criminal Law : 10 Important Judgments of Supreme Court on Criminal Law

Criminal Law : 10 Important Judgments of Supreme Court on Criminal Law 

There are many important judgments. 

10 important Judgments on criminal law of Hon'ble Supreme Court are as follows : - 

1. Lalita Kumari v Govt of UP [2013] GCtR 210 (SC) - Scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise of the information received but only to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognizable offence.

2. Shabnam v State of UP [2015] GCtR 905 (SC) - The act of slaughtering a ten month old child by strangulation in no chance reflects immature action but evidence for the lack of remorse, kindness and humanity.

3. Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v CBI [2013] GCtR 751 (SC) - Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail.

4. Ram Singh v Sonia [2007] GCtR 3205 (SC) - Extra-judicial confession made even to a stranger cannot be eschewed from consideration if it is found to have been truthful and voluntarily made before a person who has no reason to state falsely.

5. State of Punjab v DPS Bhullar [2011] GCtR 4293 (SC) - There is no power of review with the Criminal Court after judgment has been rendered. The High Court can alter or review its judgment before it is signed.

6. Kailash Gour v State of Assam [2011] GCtR 4294 (SC) - The prosecution it is axiomatic, must establish its case against the accused by leading evidence that is accepted by the standards that are known to criminal jurisprudence regardless whether the crime is committed in the course of communal disturbances or otherwise.

7. Shivlal v State of Chhattisgarh [2011] GCtR 4295 (SC) - The Magistrate must be immediately informed of every serious offence so that he may be in a position to act under Section 159 of Code of Criminal Procedure , if so required.

8. Prithipal Singh v State of Punjab [2011] GCtR 2340 (SC) - In view of the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution, any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is inhibited. Torture is not permissible whether it occurs during investigation, interrogation or otherwise.

9. Pyla Mutyalamma @ Satyavathy v Pyla Suri Demudu [2011] GCtR 4296 (SC) - The High Court under its revisional jurisdiction is not required to enter into reappreciation of evidence recorded in the order granting maintenance; at the most it could correct a patent error of jurisdiction.

10. W. Kalyani v State [2011] GCtR 4297 (SC) - From a plain reading of the Section 497 of IPC, 1860 it is seen that only a man can be proceeded against and punished for the offence of adultery. Indeed, the Section provides expressly that the wife cannot be punished even as an abettor.

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.