RanjitKumar P (Corporate / Real Estate Counsellor)’s Post

Questions under section 313, CrPC to be in a form where illiterate and ignorant persons also understand, the Meghalaya High Court observed while hearing an appeal to a POCSO case. The object of Section 313 Cr.P.C. is to afford the accused a fair and proper opportunity of explaining circumstances appearing against him, the court added. To read full article, click link below 👇 https://rb.gy/c5uf8e . . Lawstreet Journal #lsjjudiciary #lawstreetj #MeghalayaHighCourt #Section313CrPC #POCSOCase #LegalObservation #CriminalProcedureCode #FairTrial #LegalFairness #AccusedRights #LegalProceedings #JusticeSystem #LegalJustice #LegalRights #CourtObservation #LegalProcedure #CriminalLaw #LegalClarity #LegalInsights #JudicialFairness #india #legalnews

'Delhi High Court Orders Return of Seized Items After Finding No Legal Proceedings under PMLA' The Delhi High Court's recent ruling in Mr. Mahender Kumar Khandelwal v. Directorate of Enforcement and Anr. addresses the unconstitutional extended property seizures under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). It was decided that retaining seized property beyond 365 days without ongoing proceedings is confiscatory and violates Article 300A of the Constitution. This landmark judgment delineates the scope of s. 8(3) of the PMLA, emphasizing that seized property must be returned if not related to active legal proceedings, thus balancing investigation needs with constitutional property rights. This decision marks a significant step towards protecting individual rights against arbitrary state action. For a detailed understanding, please read the full article authored by our associate Mr. Aditya Gupta: https://lnkd.in/gEntvh3k #MetalegalAdvocates #MetalegalCourtRuling #PMLA #DelhiHighCourt #ConstitutionalRights #PropertySeizure #JudicialInterpretation #Article300A #LegalPrecedent

🚨 Legal Alert: Bombay High Court Declares Arrest Illegal Due to Failure to Communicate Grounds of Arrest In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court has declared an arrest illegal due to non-communication of the grounds of arrest to the accused, highlighting a breach of constitutional and procedural mandates. 🔹 Case Background: The petitioner, arrested on 01-11-2023 in connection with an FIR related to a tragic incident involving multiple IPC offenses, argued that his arrest violated Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 50 of the CrPC, as the reasons were not conveyed to him directly. 🔹 Key Findings: Violation of Rights: The Court emphasized that under Section 50 of the CrPC, full details of the offense must be immediately communicated to the arrested individual. Communication Gaps: The arrest panchnama revealed that only the accused's wife was informed via phone, not the accused himself, failing the legal requirement. Landmark References: The judgment cited Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi), reaffirming the difference between "reasons for arrest" and "grounds of arrest." 🔹 Outcome: The Division Bench ruled the arrest as unlawful and declared the remand orders null and void. The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail. This ruling reinforces the importance of adhering to constitutional safeguards during arrest procedures. #LegalUpdate #FundamentalRights #CriminalLaw #ConstitutionalLaw

Questions under section 313, CrPC to be in a form where illiterate and ignorant persons also understand, the Meghalaya High Court observed while hearing an appeal to a POCSO case. The object of Section 313 Cr.P.C. is to afford the accused a fair and proper opportunity of explaining circumstances appearing against him, the court added. To read full article, click link below 👇 https://rb.gy/5geuj4 . . Lawstreet Journal #lsjjudiciary #lawstreetj #MeghalayaHighCourt #POCSOCase #LegalObservation #CriminalProcedureCode #FairTrial #LegalFairness #AccusedRights #LegalProceedings #JusticeSystem #LegalJustice #LegalRights #CourtObservation #LegalProcedure #CriminalLaw #LegalClarity #LegalInsights #JudicialFairness #LegalAwareness #india #legalnews

India’s Right-To-Information Law Came To J&K In 2019. But Despite A Supreme Court Order, Information Is Hard To Obtain Exercise your right to information! Call RTIwala at 7999506996 and file your Online RTI now Source : Check our comment. #RTIwala #Legaltech #Legalhelp #AskRw

Delve into the intricacies of legal proceedings as we dissect the case of Raj Reddy Kallem versus The State of Haryana & Anr. This captivating case study unveils the saga of a failed business transaction that spiraled into a complex legal battle. Explore the appellant’s journey, Raj Reddy Kallem, and the respondent’s stance, as they navigate through convictions under the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) and charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Witness the twists and turns of justice as the Supreme Court intervenes, culminating in a landmark decision that reshapes the legal landscape. #SupremeCourt #LegalJudgement #CompoundingOffences https://lnkd.in/dHBSimXv

SC grants anticipatory bail to gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari's son Umar Ansari in violation of model code of conduct case Reported by Deeksha Dabas Read More Here- https://lnkd.in/gbTaeKDw #SupremeCourt #2022UPAssemblyPolls #anticipatorybail #MukhtarAnsarisonUmarKhalid #SC #violationofmodelcodeofconductcase #scconline #SCC #legalnews #legalknowledge #scctimes #legalblog #legalupdates #lawstudent #legalresearch #legalstudies #surestwaytolegalresearch #bringingyouthebestlegalnews

Flexibility in Legal Timelines: Condonation of Delay for Acquittal Appeals In a landmark decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Mohd Abaad Ali v. Directorate of Revenue Prosecution Intelligence has clarified the applicability of s. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to appeals against acquittal under s. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Authored by our associate Mr. Aditya Gupta, the judgment underscores that delays in filing such appeals can be condoned, offering prosecutorial authorities a broader scope for seeking justice. This pivotal ruling revisits and distinguishes from past precedents under the older 1908 Act, highlighting a progressive interpretation that aligns with contemporary legal frameworks. It represents a significant step in ensuring that procedural limitations do not hinder the pursuit of justice, especially in cases with substantial public interest. For a detailed analysis and further insights, please read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/gBemFC7q #MetalegalAdvocates #MetalegalCourtRulings #SupremeCourtIndia #LimitationAct #CriminalLaw #AppealRights #LegalAnalysis #TimelineFlexibility

A common misconception has been circulating regarding the purpose of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Contrary to popular belief, the section does not aim to lift the ban on confessions made to police officers as imposed by Sections 25 and 26 of the act. Instead, it serves a more nuanced purpose that warrants clarification. Section 27 seeks to render admissible statements made by an accused individual in custody, provided they are relevant to the discovery of fact. This provision is crucial in ensuring the efficient administration of justice, particularly in cases where evidence is critical to proving guilt or innocence. #SupremeCourtOfIndia #SupremeCourt #HighCourt #Legal #Law #India

Important Legal Update: Andhra Pradesh High Court Ruling The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently clarified that an accused's failure to submit their mobile phones to the police while in custody cannot be deemed as 'non-cooperation.' This decision underscores the protection offered under Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which safeguards individuals from self-incrimination. In the case of Avuthu Srinivas Reddy Versus The Station House Officer (CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 6295 and 6306 of 2024), the Court considered bail pleas from former MP N. Suresh Babu and businessman Avutu Srinivasa Reddy. The prosecution's argument hinged on the inability of the accused to provide their mobile phones, which they claimed was essential for further investigation. However, the Court referenced a precedent from the Delhi High Court, emphasizing that coercing an accused to disclose passwords or details from their devices during an ongoing trial violates constitutional protections. The Court ultimately found that the continued detention of the accused was unnecessary, noting that over 34 co-accused had already been granted bail and demonstrating that the petitioners were not likely to evade legal processes. This ruling reinforces the balance between effective investigation and constitutional rights. Source: Live Law #LegalUpdate #ConstitutionalLaw #HumanRights #Bail #CriminalJustice #AndhraPradeshHighCourt #LegalPrecedent