Varavara Rao was arrested on August 28, 2018, from his Hyderabad residence and is an under-trial in the case. An FIR was registered by the Pune Police on January 8, 2018, under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the stringent UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act). The Supreme Court... The post appeared first on .

Varavara Rao was arrested on August 28, 2018, from his Hyderabad residence and is an under-trial in the case. An FIR was registered by the Pune Police on January 8, 2018, under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the stringent UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act). The Supreme Court... The post appeared first on .

New Delhi Apr 23 PTI The Madhya Pradesh governments policy to reward or give incentives to its public prosecutors for successfully arguing death penalty cases in trial courts has come under the scanner of the Supreme CourtA bench headed by Justice U U Lalit took note of a submission of Attorney General K K Venugopal that such a practice of rewarding prosecutors should be nipped in the budThe attorney general is assisting the top court in a suo motu case registered to examine and institutionalise the process involved in collection of data and information to decide award of death penaltyOn being told about the policy or a system in Madhya Pradesh where public prosecutors are being rewarded and paid incentives for successfully arguing death penalty cases the bench asked the state counsel to put the related documents on record and be ready to defend it on May 10 the next date of hearingThere has been policy in Madhya Pradesh wherein the public prosecutors are given incentiveincrements on the basis of death sentence awarded in cases argued by them it said and asked lawyer Rukmini Bobde appearing for the state to place the policy on record and defend itThe bench which also comprised justices S Ravindra Bhat and P S Narasimha also said that it was mulling laying down guidelines to be followed in cases where maximum sentence provided for the offence is death penalty To ensure proper legal assistance to the accused facing criminal trials it said that like public prosecutors who pursue cases on behalf of the state the National Legal Services Authority NALSA can have defence counsel or public defenders office in every district of the countryI must share with you that at NALSA we are thinking of having defence counsel office in every district Something like public prosecutors officethere would be the office of public defenders Justice Lalit who is heading the NALSA said during the hearingThe bench said that currently NALSA has a very loose kind of arrangement where there are some panel and remand advocates and they keep changingHence there is a need to have an institutionalised system to ensure proper legal assistance to the accused it saidThe bench said that it has been accepted by the advocates concerned that the matter required consideration at an early date and asked them to file relevant material pertaining to award of death penalty in other jurisdictions as wellThe top court on Friday initiated the proceedings in the suo motu case to examine and institutionalise the process involved in awarding death penalty in heinous crime casesThe matter arose from a plea of one Irfan challenging the death penalty imposed on him by the trial court and confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High CourtThe bench earlier had decided to examine how courts dealing with a death sentence can procure a comprehensive analysis about the accused and the crime especially the mitigating circumstances so that the judicial officer concerned can decide whether death sentence needs to be awardedPrior to this an application was filed by Project 39A of the National Law University Delhi an anti-death penalty body seeking nod for an investigator who would collect mitigating information in favour of the accused to argue on the sentencing PTI SJK ANB ANB

New Delhi Mar 30 PTI An individual approaching a court must come with clean hands and never attempt to pollute the stream of justice by filing a document he knows is fabricated the Supreme Court has said holding a man guilty of contempt and ordering his detentionA bench headed by Justice U U Lalit noted that the man has accepted his guilt right at the initial stage and has tendered an unconditional apologyIt is well settled that a person who comes to the court must come with clean hands and never make even an attempt to pollute the stream of justice by filing a document which he knows to be false or fabricated the bench also comprising Justices S R Bhat and P S Narasimha said in its order passed on TuesdayThe top court noted that the man who was last year granted two weeks to surrender before the court concerned in connection with a matter in Maharashtra had filed an application seeking four weeks more to surrenderAlong with the application he had annexed a laboratory test report under the signature of two doctors which purportedly stated he was COVID-19 positiveThe bench noted that no extension of time to surrender was granted by the top court and after it was pointed out that the report annexed by him was forged notices were issued to the doctors concernedIt said both the doctors had filed affidavit and stated they had never issued any such certificate to the man and that the report filed by him was actually issued to a woman in April last yearThe top court had then issued notice to the man as to why contempt action be not initiated against himThe bench noted that the man has filed an affidavit tendering unconditional apology for filing the fabricated medical certificate in the apex courtHowever considering the fact that he accepted the guilt right at the initial stage and tendered an unconditional apology we impose following sentence the bench said after holding him guilty of having committed contempt of courtIt directed that he shall be taken to the office of the concerned additional registrar in-charge of security where he shall be detained till the rising of the courtThe bench said he shall also pay a fine of Rs 2000 which be deposited in the apex court registry during the course of the dayIt said the registry shall deposit the fine amount in the account of the Supreme Court Legal Services CommitteeThe top court noted that the man had earlier filed a special leave petition SLP challenging the January last year order passed by the Bombay High CourtIt said the apex court had in March 2021 did not find any reason to interfere and the SLP was dismissedThe bench noted that at the request of the counsel appearing for the man he was given two weeks to surrender himself before the court concerned PTI ABA ABA SK SK

New Delhi Dec 24 PTI The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal filed against a verdict of the Patna High Court modifying the conviction and sentence awarded to a man from life term to five years in a 38-year-old case in which a person had died after he had sustained injuries in a scuffle over grazing of crops A bench headed by Justice U U Lalit which observed that assessment made by the high court was perhaps on a liberal side refused to interfere with the August 2019 judgement We therefore see no reason to interfere with the judgement and order passed by the high court Consequently the instant appeal is dismissed the bench also comprising Justices S R Bhat and Bela M Trivedi said in its December 14 order The apex court passed the order while hearing the appeal filed by the convict against the high court verdict The petitioner and some other accused were convicted by a trial court in Bihar for the offences including that of murder and were sentenced to life imprisonment in the case They had thereafter moved the high court challenging the trial court verdict The high court in its judgement altered the conviction of one of the accused for the alleged offence punishable under section 302 murder of the Indian Penal Code to section 304 Part 1 culpable homicide not amounting to murder and sentenced him to a five-year jail All the other accused were acquitted by the high court The convict approached the top court challenging the judgement of the high court The apex court observed that acquittal of other accused is not under challenge and has attained finality We are thus concerned in this appeal by the appellant with regard to the correctness of the conviction and sentence recorded against him under section 304 Part-I of the IPC and whether he is entitled to acquittal like the other accused the bench noted in its order It noted that according to the medical evidence on record the person had suffered four injuries and the first injury which was a head injury finally proved to be fatal In the circumstances the assessment made by the high court was perhaps on a liberal side but in any case does not call for any interference in this appeal preferred by the appellant the bench said According to the prosecution the incident had happened in February 1983 when a scuffle took place over the issue of grazing of crops As per the prosecution one of the persons sustained injuries and during the course of investigation he died PTI ABA SNE

The Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the Bombay High Court judgment that held that groping a minor’s breast without “skin to skin contact” can’t be termed as sexual assault. The top court, which was hearing separate appeals of Attorney General and the National Commission for women, had on January 27 stayed the order which […]