Important Decisions of the year 2025 on Criminal Law

*Important Decisions of the year 2025 on Criminal Law* 

Dealing with a case involving allegations of S.420 of IPC, 1860 ("Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property") it is held that gravity and the nature of offence cannot be re-appreciated at the time of cancellation of the Bail, especially when it has been noticed that the allegations of the alleged forgery were also placed before the Magistrate, while the Order on Bail was made. - *Dilip Puri v. State [2025] GCtR 1922 (Delhi)*

It has been held that "any procedural irregularity or illegality found to have been committed in conducting the search or seizure during the course of investigation or thereafter, would by itself not make the entire evidence collected during the course of investigation, inadmissible, and any lapse or delay in compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act, 1985 by itself would neither vitiate the trial nor would entitle the accused to be released on bail." - *Gulam Hazrat Mirzale v. Customs [2025] GCtR 1923 (Delhi)*

It has been held that "the purpose of the TIP is that the witness, who claimed to have seen the culprit at the time of occurrence of the incident, is able to identify them in the midst of other people.  Dock identification, in a case where the accused is not previously known to the appellant, especially when it takes place when a long time has passed between the incident and the identification in Court, is a weak piece of evidence." - *Pawan Soni v. State GNCTD [2025] GCtR 1924 (Delhi)* 

"Inherent powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of any court. Further, the High Court can quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of the offence and the amicable settlement between the concerned parties. The cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to a quietus if the parties have reached an amicable settlement." - *Gaurav Redhu v. State GNCTD [2025] GCtR 1925 (Delhi)*

It has been held that the "offence under Section 279 of IPC is not an offence in personam, thereby that it affects society at large and not just the individual complainant". - *Abhay Gehlot v. State of NCTD [2025] GCtR 1926 (Delhi)*

It is held that "PMLA, 2002 and Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 have distinct statutory frameworks and nature of proceedings. S. 50 of PMLA, 2002 confers criminal investigative powers on the ED involving summons for inquiries related to money laundering, which is a scheduled offence under PMLA, 2002 and involves criminal prosecution. In contrast, S. 37 of FEMA is primarily concerned with civil-administrative investigations of foreign exchange contraventions governed by a regulatory framework distinct from Criminal Law." - *Poonam Gahllot v. ED [2025] GCtR 1927 (Delhi)*

"The power to grant probation has to be exercised after keeping in mind the character of the offender, the nature of the offence and the overall circumstances of the case. The main object to grant probation to the offenders is to facilitate their reintegration into the society and aiding in their reformation." - *Jinte @ Jitender v. State of NCTD [2025] GCtR 1928 (Delhi)*