#B V Nagarathna

[seemabhatnagar]

“Supreme Court Remands Conviction Case to Calcutta High Court for Independent Evidence Evaluation”

◆ In this case the High Court while hearing the Criminal Appeal of the alleged accused Amar Sardar affirmed the conviction order as passed by the Trial Court.

◆ Whereas, the High Court being First Appellate Court was expected to evaluate the evidence independently. Over-reliance on Trial Court findings without independent assessment violates principles of natural justice.

➡️In this *Case the appellant, Amar Sardar, was charged under Sections 376, 511, and 354 of the IPC for attempting to commit rape and assaulting a woman.

◆ The Fast Track Court, Howrah, convicted him and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment:

→ 2 years with a fine of ₹2,000 (default: 1-month simple imprisonment) under Section 354 IPC.

→ 7 years with a fine of ₹10,000 (default: 3-month simple imprisonment) under Sections 376 and 511 IPC.

◆ The sentences were to run concurrently.

◆ The High Court of Calcutta dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence.

#Criminalappeal #evidenceevaluation #HighCourtduty

➡️ The primary legal issue in this case was whether the High Court failed to independently assess the evidence while deciding the criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC.

➡️The Appellant's Counsel submitted that the High Court merely reiterated the Trial Court's findings without independent evaluation of evidence.

→ The judgment lacked detailed reasoning and did not critically assess the prosecution’s case.

➡️ The respondent State rebutted the contention of the Appellant's Counsel stating that the High Court appropriately sustained the Trial Court's decision after analyzing the evidence and arguments.

→ The judgment adequately addressed the appeal.

#personalliberty #convictionreview #independentreasoning

➡️ The Apex Court observed

→ The High Court, as an appellate body, must independently evaluate the evidence and apply its mind while deciding appeals under Section 374(2) CrPC.

→ Convictions impact personal liberty; hence, judgments must contain independent reasoning.

→ The High Court cannot merely reproduce the findings of the Trial Court without its own analysis.

→ The judgment in this case lacked independent consideration and relied excessively on the Trial Court’s findings.

#remand #SupremeCourt

➡️The Supreme Court set aside the Calcutta High Court’s judgment as the High Court failed to independently evaluate the evidence undermined the appellate process.

→ The matter was remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration, with instructions to re-assess the evidence and arguments independently.

→ The appellant was granted liberty to file an application for suspension of sentence during the rehearing of the appeal.

*Case Amar Sardar v. The State of West Bengal

(Criminal Appeal) SLP 14976/2024, Before the Supreme Court of India

Heard by Hon'ble Madam Justice B V Nagarathna J & Hon'ble Mr. Justice N K Singh J

[fundamentalrights]

Private Property can Be Considered “material resources of the community” #article39(b)

#supremecourt #Article39(b) #dpsp  #SupremeCourtDebate #Article39bDebate #MaterialResources #privatepropertyrights

The Big debate

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (23 April) commenced hearing on the issue whether private property can be brought under “material resources of the community” which the state is called upon to distribute equally as per Article 39(b) of the Constitution.

BENCH:

The nine-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Abhay S Oka, B V Nagarathna, J B Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Ujjal Bhuyan, Satish Chandra Sharma and Augustine George Masih, is hearing the case.

Article 39(b) of the Constitution of India places an obligation on “The State” to create policy towards securing “that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good”.

This provision falls under Part IV of the Constitution titled “Directive Principles of State Policy”, which are meant to be guiding principles for the enactment of laws, but are not directly enforceable against citizens.

Bombay High Court, Constitution Bench, Directive Principles of State Policy, private property, Supreme Court #SupremeCourtDebate #Article39bDebate #MaterialResources #PrivatePropertyRights #ConstitutionalDebate #SCDirectivePrinciples #DPSP #EqualityBeforeLaw #LegalPrinciples #ConstitutionBench #directiveprinciples

Article 39(b),DPSP,Constitution,Constitutional bench,CJI,Supreme Court,Live,today,Constitution Bench,Article 39(b) Of DPSP,Indian constitution,Fundametal right,Material resources,Article39,Article 14,Article 19,Article 39(c),Article 39(c) of DPSP,directive principles of state policy,Aritcle 21

[wordexpress]

SC allows rape survivor to terminate pregnancy

“In the context of abortion, the right of dignity entails recognising the competence and authority of every woman to take reproductive decisions,” the SC said. 

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday allowed a 25-year-old rape survivor to abort her 27-week foetus, setting aside a Gujarat High Court order that rejected her plea to terminate the pregnancy. Noting that the woman is clinically fit for the procedure, a bench of judges B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan said the HC was wrong in refusing to allow the procedure.

Under the law, the upper limit for termination of pregnancy is 24 weeks.

“In the context of abortion, the right of dignity entails recognising the competence and authority of every woman to take reproductive decisions,” the SC said.

“Sexual assault is itself distressing and sexual abuse resulting in pregnancy compounds the injury… such a pregnancy is not voluntary or mindful,” the bench said.

The apex court also castigated the HC single-bench for passing a clarificatory order on Saturday, after the SC had taken up the matter for urgent hearing. “We do not appreciate the High Court passing an order as a counterblast to SC order… What is happening in High Court of Gujarat?” it said.

The SC said if the foetus is found to be alive, the hospital shall extend all necessary medical assistance including incubation. If it survives, the State shall take steps to ensure the child is adopted in accordance with the law, it added.

[blogynews]

"Groundbreaking Verdict: Supreme Court Grants Rape Survivor's Right to Terminate Pregnancy, Revealing Startling Connection to Conception Outside Marriage | India News"

The Supreme Court of India has granted permission to a rape survivor to undergo medical termination of her pregnancy. The decision was made by a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, who criticized the Gujarat High Court for rejecting the survivor’s request for termination. The Supreme Court highlighted that pregnancy outside marriage, especially in cases of sexual assault, can be…

[blogynewz]

"Groundbreaking Verdict: Supreme Court Grants Rape Survivor's Right to Terminate Pregnancy, Revealing Startling Connection to Conception Outside Marriage | India News"

The Supreme Court of India has granted permission to a rape survivor to undergo medical termination of her pregnancy. The decision was made by a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, who criticized the Gujarat High Court for rejecting the survivor’s request for termination. The Supreme Court highlighted that pregnancy outside marriage, especially in cases of sexual assault, can be…

[blogynewsz]

"Groundbreaking Verdict: Supreme Court Grants Rape Survivor's Right to Terminate Pregnancy, Revealing Startling Connection to Conception Outside Marriage | India News"

The Supreme Court of India has granted permission to a rape survivor to undergo medical termination of her pregnancy. The decision was made by a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, who criticized the Gujarat High Court for rejecting the survivor’s request for termination. The Supreme Court highlighted that pregnancy outside marriage, especially in cases of sexual assault, can be…

[12blogmk]

SC rejects Bengal plea against central forces in rural polls | India News

NEW DELHI: In a blow to the Mamata government, the Supreme Court Tuesday allowed deployment of central forces during the July 8 panchayat polls to 75,000 posts across West Bengal, reports Amit Anand Choudhary.A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Manoj Misra rejected the plea of the Trinamool government and state election commission, which had approached the SC, challenging the Calcutta HC order…

[newsdaynight]

5 में से एक जज की नोटबंदी के विरोध में, जानिए जस्टिस बी वी नागरत्ना का क्या था वो फैसला

Delhi: Justice B V nagarathna News: नोटबंदी पर आज सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने 4: 1 से नोटबंदी की प्रक्रिया को सही ठहराया। हालांकि, जस्टिस बी वी नागरत्ना ने अपनी अलग राय रखी और फैसले में कहा कि नोटबंदी को कानून के जरिए लाना चाहिए था। http://dlvr.it/SgGStj

[arun-pratap-singh]

Demonetisation had to be done through legislation: Justice Nagarathna

Demonetisation had to be done through legislation: Justice Nagarathna

New Delhi: Justice B V Nagarathna of the Supreme Court, who gave a dissenting verdict on demonetisation on Monday, said the scrapping of the whole series of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes had to be done through a legislation and not through a gazette notification as Parliament cannot be left aloof in a matter of such critical importance. Justice Nagarathna, who was the juniormost judge in the…

[rickztalk]

Demonetisation had to be done through legislation: Justice Nagarathna

Demonetisation had to be done through legislation: Justice Nagarathna

Observing that there was no independent application of mind by the RBI, Justice said the entire exercise was carried out in 24 hours New Delhi: Justice B V Nagarathna of the Supreme Court, who gave a dissenting verdict on demonetisation on Monday, said the scrapping of the whole series of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes had to be done through a legislation and not through a gazette…

[seemabhatnagar]

The present Criminal Appeal challenges the order passed by the Telangana High Court, upholding the interim maintenance order passed by the Family Court in favor of the Respondent-Wife, however, the amount of interim maintenance was reduced.

Mohd. Abdul Samad v. The State of Telangana

Crl Appeal 2842 of 2024

Before the Supreme Court of India

Heard by Hon'ble Madam Justice B V Nagarathna J and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih J

Fact

The Appellant is the husband of Respondent No. 02, who entered into a matrimonial alliance with her on November 15, 2012. However, as their relationship deteriorated, Respondent No. 02 left the matrimonial home on April 9, 2016. Subsequently, Respondent No. 02 initiated criminal proceedings against the appellant by lodging an FIR in 2017 for offenses punishable under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC.

In response, the appellant (husband) pronounced a triple talaq on September 25, 2017, and sought a declaration of divorce from the office of Quzath, which was eventually granted ex parte in September 2017.

The appellant attempted to send INR 15,000 as maintenance for the iddat (three months) period, which Respondent No. 02 refused to accept. Instead, she moved a petition for interim maintenance under Section 125(1) of the CrPC before the Family Court, which was consequently allowed in June 2023.

Legal Issue

Does the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 take precedence over the General Law?

Points of Argument

Appellant’s argument

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 is a special law providing more comprehensive benefits than Section 125 CrPC, including provisions for mehr, dower, and return of property.

The Act, is a complete code, and it overrides Section 125 CrPC, since it includes lifelong maintenance provisions for divorced Muslim women.

It was also argued that special laws generally prevail over general laws, thus the Act should take precedence.

Sections 3 and 4 of the 1986 Act, empowers First Class Magistrates to decide matters of Maher (mandatory gift that the husband gives to his wife at the wedding) and subsistence allowances. 

The family courts lack jurisdiction as the Act mandates Magistrates to handle these issues.

The Respondent-wife didn't file an affidavit opting for CrPC provisions over the 1986 Act, as required by Section 5 of the Muslim Women Act, 1986.

The 1986 Act implicitly repealed Section 125 CrPC for Muslim women due to its specific provisions, thus barring them from seeking relief under Section 125 CrPC.

Argument by Amicus Curaie for the Respondent Wife

The 1986 Act only codifies Muslim personal law and does not negate the reliefs available under Section 125 CrPC.

He emphasized that the purpose of Section 125 is to provide quick relief to deserted or neglected women, irrespective of their religion.

Courts Observation

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986 does not bar the applicability of Section 125 CrPC, granting Muslim women the option to seek maintenance under either provision.

Order

The Criminal Appeal was dismissed. In their separate but concurring judgments, the Hon'ble Madam Justice B V Nagarathna J and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih J have provided clear conclusions regarding the application of Section 125 CrPC and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 as well. A Muslim woman can choose both or either.

[technodabhi]

First time offender can also be prosecuted under UP Gangster Act: Supreme Court | India News

First time offender can also be prosecuted under UP Gangster Act: Supreme Court | India News

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday held a person does not have to be a repeated offender to be prosecuted under the stringent Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, and the first time offender can also face the charges under the special law after being part of a gang. A bench of Justices M R Shah and B V Nagarathna rejected the plea of a woman challenging her…

[tezlivenews]

ऐसा पहली बार होगा... पिता के बाद बेटी और बेटा बनेंगे सुप्रीम कोर्ट के चीफ जस्टिस

ऐसा पहली बार होगा… पिता के बाद बेटी और बेटा बनेंगे सुप्रीम कोर्ट के चीफ जस्टिस

नई दिल्लीसुप्रीम कोर्ट को आज 9 और जज मिल गए। सुबह सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऑडिटोरियम में शपथ ग्रहण समारोह संपन्न हुआ। शपथ ग्रहण के साथ ही कई सारी चीजें ऐसी हुईं जो इसके पहले कभी नहीं देखने को मिली। पहली बार एक साथ नौ जज शपथ लिए और शपथ ग्रहण भी कोर्टरूम में न होकर ऑडिटोरियम में हुआ। पहली बार ही शपथ ग्रहण लाइव टेलीकास्ट भी हुआ। आज का दिन सुप्रीम कोर्ट के लिए ऐतिहासिक रहा।Supertech Noida Case: सुपरटेक को…

[squarwell-breakingnews]

Raj Kundra, Poonam Pandey and Sherlyn Chopra granted anticipatory bail in pornography case - Times of India ►

Raj Kundra, Poonam Pandey and Sherlyn Chopra granted anticipatory bail in pornography case – Times of India ►

Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to Raj Kundra, Poonam Pandey and Sherlyn Chopra pornography case. Their bail is in connection to an FIR which was filed against them for allegedly distributing pornographic videos. “Having heard the counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail,” a bench of Justices K M Joseph and B V Nagarathna stated.…