Important Decisions of 2023 on Criminal Law

 Important Decisions of 2023 on Criminal Law 

◾ It was categorically reiterated that "recall of witness is not a matter of course and power under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. has to be exercised judiciously, with caution and circumspection, and not arbitrarily or capriciously. Such power is to be exercised on the basis of facts and circumstances of each case, and the discretionary power has to be balanced carefully with considerations such as uncalled for hardship to the witnesses and uncalled for delay in trial." - Rajesh Marwah v State [2023] GCtR 2243 (Delhi)

◾ "In order to file a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act the service of notice to the drawer is a sine qua non and the burden to show that same has been served lies on the complainant as the cause of action for filing the complaint accrues only after the essential conditions enshrined in the proviso to Section 138 of the NI Act stands complied with." - Bhavna v State [2023] GCtR 2004 (Delhi)

◾ "Section 399 of the CrPC provides that in case of any proceedings, the record of which has been called by the learned Sessios Judge, the latter may exercise any of the powers which may be exercised by the High Court under Section 401(1) of the CrPC. Section 389 of the CrPC provides for suspension of sentence pending appeal and release of the appellant on bail. Sections 390 and 391 of the CrPC provide for arrest of the accused in an appeal from acquittal and for power of the appellate court to take further evidence, respectively. A perusal of the provisions demonstrates that the ASJ, while examining the petitions challenging the order on charge, had no jurisdiction to pass an order under Section 309 of the CrPC." - Bimalendu Ghosh Dastidar v State [2023] GCtR 2244 (Delhi)

◾ "The mandate of Section 323 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is clear. When a case is committed by the Magistrate to the Court of Session, the trial would have to begin de novo. The Court of Session would first frame charges and then proceed with the examination of the witnesses." - Shankar @ Gori Sankar v State of NCTD [2023] GCtR 2245 (Delhi)

◾ "Heinous offences like rape cannot normally be quashed on the basis of settlement. Such offences have a large impact on the society and quashing them on the basis of settlement would be opposed to public policy. Quashing of FIR under Section 376 of the IPC, on the basis of settlement, would go against protecting the dignity of a woman and the very moral fabric of the society at large." - Pushpendra v State [2023] GCtR 2246 (Delhi)

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.