Supreme Court: Courts Should Adopt Liberal Approach In Condoning Delay In Appeals Filed By Convicts from jail

We are deeply dismayed, and equally perturbed by the

order which rejected an application seeking condonation of delay

of 3157 days and as a consequence dismissed the ‘Jail Memo of

Appeal’ against the order of conviction under Section 302, with

sentence imposed of life imprisonment where the convict had, at

the time of the impugned order suffered incarceration of 12 years

and now a further period of 10 years; a total of 22 years. {Para 2}

3. Access to justice still eludes the marginalized sections of our

society and especially those convicted and imprisoned from

amongst them. When the three pillars of democracy consistently

endeavor to bring legal aid to the doorsteps of every citizen,

especially the poor, the needy and the deprived, we, in the

Constitutional Courts should introspect to sensitize ourselves in

taking a liberal approach insofar as delay occasioned in filing an

appeal from an order of conviction and sentence, depriving a

person, the most valuable and fundamental of all rights; liberty.

Not a mere liberal approach but a pro-active one to condone

delay, however large it is when a convict knocks at the door of a

Court, in appeal, which in the present case raises some real

concerns. 

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Criminal Appeal No…………..of 2026

(@Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.7128 of 2026)

Arjun Jani @ Tuntun Vs   State of Orissa

Author: K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

Citation: 2026 INSC 802

Dated: AUGUST 04, 2026.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Under which circumstances, the appellate court can set aside conviction of accused in offence under S 201 of IPC without appeal of accused?

 However, we are of the view that the High Court clearly fell into error in affirming the conviction of the accused-respondent for the offence punishable under Section 201 of the IPC.

35. It is not in dispute that the accused-respondent has not preferred any appeal challenging his conviction for the said offence. However, the absence of an appeal by the accused-respondent does not, by itself, denude this Court of its appellate jurisdiction. In exercise of powers under Section 386 of the CrPC

[corresponding to Section 427 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023], the appellate Court is vested with the power to examine the correctness of the findings and sentence recorded by the Court below and to reverse, alter or affirm the

same, as the interests of justice may require.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2026

(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 8846 of 2025)

THE STATE OF ASSAM  Vs  MOINUL HAQUE @ MONU 

Mehta, J.

Dated: APRIL 16, 2026.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Questions and answers on law (Part 89)

 Q 1:- In a criminal appeal if it is brought to your notice as sessions judge  that all incriminating questions were not asked to the accused by the trial court, what are the options available to you as an appellate court? 

Ans:- Yes. If in a criminal appeal, it is found that all incriminating circumstances were not put to the accused under Section 313 CrPC, the appellate court must first see whether that omission caused material prejudice or failure of justice; the omission does not automatically vitiate the trial.

30-second answer

Print Page

Supreme Court: Procedure the appellate court should follow if they appoints amicus in any criminal appeal

 Having regard to the dictum of the three-Judge Bench in

Anokhi Lal (supra) and in order to curb the tendency of convicts to

raise technical pleas of the nature which were advanced before us,

we observe that, henceforth, whenever an appellate court considers

it desirable to appoint an amicus to represent a convict whose

counsel is absent, such court may also consider the desirability of

issuing a notice from the registry to the address of the convict

mentioned in the memorandum of appeal, for such notice to be

served on him through the jurisdictional police station, with an

intimation that the convict may contact the learned amicus and

provide him necessary instructions so that his case is argued before

the court effectively and meaningfully. In the event the convict

contacts the amicus and provides instructions, there would

ordinarily be no impediment in proceeding with hearing of the

appeal. If, indeed, the convict desires to have his own counsel argue

the appeal on his behalf and not the amicus, the court may hear

such counsel in addition to the amicus. However, if the service

report indicates that the convict was not found at the address or

that he refused to accept notice despite being present, it would

amount to sufficient compliance if the notice is pasted on the outer

wall of the premises, address whereof is mentioned in the cause title

of the memorandum of appeal. Should the convict still remain

dormant, and it is so reported, the High Court may proceed to

decide the appeal without waiting for the convict to turn up either in

person or through the counsel of his choice engaged by him. This

process, in our view, would substantially serve the purpose of

eliminating any plea of unfairness being raised before this Court if

an appeal is disposed of upon hearing the amicus appointed by the

court. Additionally, in a case of like nature where the appeal is listed two decades after grant of bail, this process would ensure obtaining of information as to whether the appeal survives for decision or stands abated.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026

BHOLA MAHTO   VS. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND 

Citation: 2026 INSC 257 .

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Digest of Caselaws on Civil and criminal appeal and revision

 

1) Leading SC and other HC Judgments on Civil appeal, criminal appeal, civil revision, criminal revision and remand of case (Part 1)

https://www.lawweb.in/2021/03/leading-judgments-on-civil-appeal-civil.html

2) Leading SC and other HC Judgments on Civil appeal, criminal appeal, civil revision, criminal revision and remand of case (Part 2).

https://www.lawweb.in/2024/08/leading-sc-and-other-hc-judgments-on.html

3) Notes on Civil appeal

Print Page

Supreme Court: What parameters Appellate court should follow while deciding appeal against acquittal?

 From the aforesaid decisions rendered by this Court, it can be said that if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the findings of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court. Further, if the view taken is a possible view, the Appellate Court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible. The following principles have to be kept in mind by the Appellate Court while dealing with the appeals against an order of acquittal:

(a) whether the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;

(b) whether the judgment is based on misreading/omission to consider the material evidence on record;

(c) an order of acquittal is to be interfered with only when there are “compelling and substantial reasons” for doing so. If the order is “clearly unreasonable”, it is a compelling reason for interference.’

(d) the appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;

(e) if the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and

(f) the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the Accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible. {Para 29}

30. Keeping in view the aforesaid principles and the law laid down by this Court, if the entire evidence as well as the order of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court and the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court are examined, we are of the view that the High Court has failed to consider the aforesaid aspect while dealing with the acquittal appeals.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 2120-2121 of 2024 and 2542-2543 of 2024

Decided On: 16.01.2026

Tulasareddi and Ors. Vs. The State of Karnataka and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V.M. Pancholi and Sanjay Karol, JJ.

Author: V.M. Pancholi, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0072/2026.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Asking Accused To Appear In Every Criminal Appeal Hearing Unwarranted When Sentence Has Been Suspended

 It is appalling and shocking to note that appellate court having insisted for appearance of the appellant on every date of hearing particularly in the backdrop of the suspension of sentence already passed. Prima facie the course open for the appellate court was to either appoint an amicus curiae and hear the appeal on merits and pass appropriate orders thereon or grant an opportunity to the concerned appellant-accused to make alternate arrangement if counsel was not assisting the Court. {Para 8}

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026

ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) NO. 19050 OF 2025

MEENAKSHI Vs  STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER

Dated: JANUARY 07th, 2026.

Print Page

The Dichotomy of Criminal Appeals: Understanding the Distinction Between Convict-Initiated and State-Initiated Appeals Under the CrPC

 Criminal appeals in India operate under a carefully structured framework established by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), which creates distinct pathways for different appellants based on their procedural position and substantive rights. The fundamental distinction between appeals filed by convicted persons and those initiated by the State, victim, or complainant reflects deeper principles of natural justice, procedural fairness, and the protective doctrine of reformatio in peius. This differentiation, enshrined primarily in Section 386 CrPC, serves as a critical safeguard ensuring that appellate remedies do not inadvertently prejudice those seeking judicial relief.

Constitutional and Statutory Framework of Appeal Rights

Print Page

Supreme Court: Appellate court can not enhance sentence in appeal filed by accused against conviction in absence of counter appeal by complainant or state

 In this regard, it must be noted that for exercise of powers of the appellate court for enhancement of sentence in an appeal filed either by the State or the complainant or the victim, the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that the appellate court can reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the Accused, or order him to be re-tried by a court competent to try the offence, or alter the finding by maintaining the sentence, or with or without altering the finding, alter the nature or the extent, of the sentence so as to enhance or reduce the same. Thus, the power to enhance the sentence can be exercised by the appellate court only in an appeal filed by the State, victim or complainant, provided the Accused has had an opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement. It is further provided that the appellate court shall not inflict greater punishment for the offence which in its opinion the Accused has committed, than might have been inflicted for that offence by the court passing the order of sentence under appeal. Therefore, in an appeal for enhancement of sentence filed by the State etc., unless the conditions prescribed in the form of provisos to Section 386 of Code of Criminal Procedure are complied with by the appellate court, there cannot be an enhancement of sentence. Obviously in such an appeal for enhancement of sentence, the convict or the Accused is the Respondent and therefore there cannot be enhancement of sentence unless the Accused or convict has been heard. However, under the scheme of Section 386 of Code of Criminal Procedure vis-a-vis in an appeal for enhancement of sentence, there can also be an acquittal of the Accused as per Sub-clause (i) of Clause (c) of Section 386 of Code of Criminal Procedure. But, on the other hand, in an appeal from a conviction, it has been expressly stated that there cannot be enhancement of the sentence. Therefore, while in an appeal for enhancement of sentence filed by the State, the Accused can make out a case for acquittal or discharge or retrial, in the case of an appeal from conviction, the Respondent in such an appeal, namely the State or the victim or the complainant, cannot seek enhancement of the sentence than what has been awarded by the Trial Court in the absence of filing any appeal or revision. The above distinction can be explained by way of a latin maxim which has been discussed by Ujjal Bhuyan, J., while in Bombay High Court, in Jyoti Plastic Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.,   MANU/MH/1857/2020, in the following words:

40. In this connection we may refer to the maxim reformatio in peius. It is a latin phrase meaning a change towards the worse i.e., a change for the worse. As a legal expression it means that a lower court judgment is amended by a higher court into a worse one for those appealing it. In many jurisdictions, this practice is forbidden ensuring that an Appellant cannot be placed in a worse position as a result of filing an appeal. When the above phrase is prefixed by the words 'no' or 'prohibition', which would render the maxim as no reformatio in peius or prohibition of reformatio in peius, it would denote a principle of procedure as per which using a remedy available in law should not aggravate the situation of the person who avails the remedy. In other words, a person should not be placed in a worse position as a result of filing an appeal. No reformatio in peius or prohibition of reformatio in peius is a part of fair procedure and thus by extension can also be construed as part of natural justice. It is not only a procedural guarantee but is also a principle of equity.

14. The rationale of the above can be explained in simple language by stating that no Appellant by filing an appeal can be worse-off than what he was. That is exactly what we are seeking to reiterate in our judgment having regard to the facts of the present case.{Para 13}

Ratio Decidendi:

In an appeal filed by the Accused/convict and in the absence of any appeal filed by the victim, complainant or the State, the High Court cannot exercise suo motu revision either to enhance the sentence or to convict the Appellant on any other charge.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 2892-2893 of 2025.

Decided On: 04.06.2025

Nagarajan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.V. Nagarathna and S.C. Sharma, JJ.

Author: B.V. Nagarathna, J.

Citation: 2025 INSC 802,MANU/SC/0808/2025.

Print Page

When Vagueness Breeds Litigation: The Imperative for Judicial Clarity in Educational Expense Orders Under the PWDV Act

 Abstract

Recent judicial developments have highlighted a critical gap in domestic violence jurisprudence: the enforcement challenges arising from vague court orders regarding educational expenses. This article examines a landmark appellate decision that established stringent documentation requirements and specificity standards for educational expense claims under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDV Act), 2005. The judgment reinforces the principle that judicial orders must be "clear, specific and enforceable" to prevent abuse of process and unnecessary litigation.

Introduction

Print Page

Supreme Court: In criminal case also order of the appellate court relates back to the order of the Trial Court

 85. This Court in Maru Ram v. Union of India, (1981) 1 SCC 107 held that:

“56. We are mindful of one anomaly and must provide for its elimination. If the Trial Court acquits and the higher Court convicts and it so happens that the acquittal is before Section 433-A came into force and the conviction after it, could it be that the convicted person would be denied the benefit of prospectivity and consequential non-application of Section 433-A merely because he had the bad luck to be initially acquitted? We think not. When a person is convicted in appeal, it follows that the appellate Court has exercised its power in the place of the original court and the guilt, conviction and sentence must be substituted for and shall have retroactive effect from the date of judgment of the Trial Court. The appellate conviction must relate back to the date of the Trial Court's verdict and substitute it. In this view, even if the appellate Court reverses an earlier acquittal rendered before Section 433-A came into force but allows the appeal and convicts the accused, after Section 433-A came into force, such persons will also be entitled to the benefit of the remission system prevailing prior to Section 433-A on the basis we have explained. An appeal is a continuation of an appellate judgment as a replacement of the original judgment. [Freedom Behind Bars — Criminology and Consciousness, Series I, 1979, Maharshi European Research University Press Publication, p. 73]”

(Emphasis supplied)

86. The judgment in Maru Ram (supra) is relevant to the extent that the order of the appellate court relates back to the order of the Trial Court on the premise that an appeal is a continuation of trial and an appellate judgment is a replacement of the original judgment.

In the Supreme Court of India

(Before J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ.)

Jamin and Another  Vs  State of Uttar Pradesh and Another 

Criminal Appeal No. 1184 of 2025 (Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) No. 6320 of 2024)

Decided on March 6, 2025

Citation: 2025 SCC OnLine SC 506.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

What legal principles the session judge should follow while deciding criminal appeal?

Introduction

The appellate process in criminal cases is a vital mechanism to ensure justice, safeguard rights, and maintain legal integrity in India. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), accused persons have the opportunity to challenge lower court judgments through appeals. However, not every grievance qualifies for appellate intervention. Indian criminal law outlines specific grounds for appeal supported by constitutional guarantees of due process and demands reasoned judgments from appellate courts. This article explores these principles in detail to help legal practitioners, law students, and justice seekers understand the appellate framework.

Grounds for Criminal Appeal in Indian Law

When a criminal appeal is filed, it must be grounded in identifiable and legally recognized errors or issues in the trial court’s decision. The key grounds commonly invoked include:

Print Page

Can prosecution or accused apply for alteration of charge in criminal appeal?

 Power to Alter Charges: Exclusive Judicial Prerogative

The power to alter charges under Section 216 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) lies exclusively with the court and cannot be invoked through an application by either the prosecution or the accused. This principle applies equally to both trial courts and appellate courts.

No Right to Apply for Charge Alteration

Neither party can seek alteration as a matter of right. The Supreme Court has clearly established that there is no right in any party to seek addition or alteration of charges by filing any application as a matter of right. The Kerala High Court reinforced this principle, noting that while a prosecution's application for charge alteration could not be entertained, the trial court retained discretion to independently alter or add charges if deemed necessary based on evidence presented.

Print Page

Whether session court can decide criminal appeal or criminal revision in absence of accused?

 Sessions courts in India have specific limitations regarding deciding criminal appeals and revisions in the absence of the accused, with established legal principles that prioritize fair trial and due process.

General Principle Against Deciding in Absence

Criminal cases, whether trials, appeals, or revisions, should generally not be decided against an accused in their absence. The Supreme Court has consistently held that "criminal case, whether trial, appeal or revision should not be decided against accused in absence of his counsel". This principle stems from Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees protection to life and personal liberty.

Print Page

Safeguarding Justice: Supreme Court Reinforces the Sanctity of Complete Trial Records in Appellate Proceedings

 Recently, this Court in Dhananjay Rai alias Guddu Rai v. State of Bihar13 (two-Judges) took note of a Judgment rendered in Bani Singh v. State of U.P.14, as under:

“14. We have carefully considered the view expressed in the said two decisions of this Court and, we may state that the view taken in Shyam Deo case [(1971) 1 SCC 855 : 1971 SCC (Cri) 353 : AIR 1971 SC 1606] appears to be sound except for a minor clarification which we consider necessary to mention. The plain language of Section 385 makes it clear that if the appellate Court does not consider the appeal fit for summary dismissal, it ‘must’ call for the record and Section 386 mandates that after the record is received, the appellate Court may dispose of the appeal after hearing the accused or his counsel. Therefore, the plain language of Sections 385-386 does not contemplate dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution simpliciter. On the contrary, the Code envisages disposal of the appeal on merits after perusal and scrutiny of the record. The law clearly expects the appellate Court to dispose of the appeal on merits, not merely by perusing the reasoning of the trial court in the judgment, but by cross-checking the reasoning with the evidence on record with a view to satisfying itself that the reasoning and findings recorded by the trial court are consistent with the material on record.”  {Para 29}

(Emphasis supplied)

Conclusions

37. Protection of the rights under Article 21 entails protection of liberty from any restriction thereupon in the absence of fair legal procedure. Fair legal procedure includes the opportunity for the person filing an appeal to question the conclusions drawn by the trial court. The same can only be done when the record is available with the Court of Appeal. That is the mandate of Section 385 of the CrPC. Therefore, in the considered view of this Court, it is not within prudence to lay down a straightjacket formula, we hold that non-compliance with the mandate of the section, in certain cases contingent upon specific facts and circumstances of the case, would result in a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which we find it to be so in the instant case.

38. The language of Section 385 shows that the Court sitting in appeal governed thereby is required to call for the records of the case from the concerned Court below. The same is an obligation, power coupled with a duty, and only after the perusal of such records would an appeal be decided.

Ratio: 

 Right to appeal includes an opportunity for the person filing an appeal to question the conclusions drawn by the trial court. Thus, the mandates of Section 385 of the CrPC can only be followed when the record lower court is available with the Court of Appeal.

In the Supreme Court of India

(Before Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol, JJ.)

Criminal Appeal No……………of 2023

Arising out of

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 2063 of 2023

Jitendra Kumar Rode Vs  Union of India 

Decided on April 24, 2023

Citation: 2023 SCC ONLINE SC 485,2023 INSC 419 

Print Page

Redefining Appellate Justice: How Jitendra Kumar Rode Transforms the Constitutional Right to Fair Appeal in the Digital Age

 Introduction

The Supreme Court's judgment in Jitendra Kumar Rode v. Union of India represents a watershed moment in Indian criminal jurisprudence, establishing a novel constitutional principle that elevates procedural compliance from mere technicality to fundamental right. This case addresses the substantial question of whether appellate courts can legitimately uphold convictions without access to complete trial records, ultimately ruling that such proceedings violate the constitutional guarantee of due process under Article 21.

Background and Factual Matrix

The case emerged from a corruption prosecution dating back to 1995, when Jitendra Kumar Rode, an Assistant Commercial Manager with Northern Railway, was accused of accepting a ₹500 bribe from a Chief Ticket Inspector. The Special Judge convicted him in 1999 under Sections 7, 13(1), and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment and fines.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Complainant In S.138 NI Act Case Can File Appeal Against Acquittal As 'Victim' Under S.372 Proviso CrPC

A person who is a complainant under Section 200 of the CrPC who complains about the offence committed by a person who is charged as an accused under Section 138 of the Act, thus has the right to prefer an appeal as a victim under the proviso to  Section 372 of the CrPC.

10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC was inserted in the statute book only with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the victim of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of the CrPC.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. OF 2025

M/s. CELESTIUM FINANCIAL  Vs  A. GNANASEKARAN ETC. 

Citation:  2025 INSC 804.

Dated: APRIL 08, 2025.

Print Page

Gauhati HC Extends Benefit Of Probation of offenders Act To Man Convicted U/S 498A IPC, Says Offence Was Not Heinous

 It is by now well settled that Act, 1958 is a milestone in progress of modern liberal trend of reform in the field of Penology. It is the result of recognition of the doctrine that the object of criminal law is more to reform the individual offender than to punish him. It was also held by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ved Prakash Vs. State of Haryana reported in 1981 1 SCC 447, that sentencing an accused person is a sensitive exercise of discretion and not a routine or mechanical prescription acting on hunch. The Trial court should collect material necessary to award a just punishment in circumstances. It was further held that the social background and the personal factors of the crime doer are very relevant in this regard. {Para 7}

8. In the case of Sita Ram Paswan Vs. State of Bihar reported in AIR 2005 SC 3534, the Hon’ble Apex Court has laid down certain principle for exercise of discretionary power under the Act and the consideration required. The Hon’ble Apex Court opined that while exercising the discretionary power under the Act 1958, the courts are to consider the circumstances of the case, the nature of offence and the character of the offender. While considering the nature of the offence, the court must take a realistic view of the gravity of the offence, the impact which the offence had on the victim. It was concluded by the Hon’ble Apex Court that the benefit available to the accused under section 4 of the Act, 1958 is subject to the Limitation embodied in the provision and the word ‘may’ clearly indicates that the discretion is vested with the court whether to release the offender in exercise of power under section 3/4 of the Act, 1958, having regard to the nature of the offence, the character of the offender and overall circumstances of the case.

9. It was further held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that such power can be exercised by the court even at the appellate or revisional stage or also by Apex Court hearing appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

10. Now, in the backdrop of the aforesaid settled proposition of law, let this court consider the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

11. In the case in hand, the offence was committed on 11.02.2008. The nature of offence cannot also be said to be heinous in the given circumstances of the present case. The victim and the accused have got remarried as recorded hereinabove. The accused has also offered the Mohr, paid the maintenance awarded, the wife had also withdrawn the maintenance case and in view of the aforesaid, in the considered opinion of this Court that this is a fit case where the benefit of provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 should be given to the accused petitioner by this court in exercise of its revisonal power.

 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./331/2013

MD. BADRUT ZAMAN Vs  THE STATE OF ASSAM

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

Date of Judgement : 19.12.2024.

Citation:  2024:GAU-AS:12939.

Print Page

Leading SC and other HC Judgments on Civil appeal, criminal appeal, civil revision, criminal revision and remand of case (Part 2)

 

1) Supreme Court: All grounds that may be urged in support of the revision petition may be urged in the appeal, but not vice versa.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Appeal (crl.) 808 of 2002

Decided On: 13.08.2002

Bindeshwari Prasad Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

M.B. Shah and B.P. Singh, JJ.

Author: B.P. Singh, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0670/2002,AIR 2002 SC 2907,2002 INSC 332.

https://www.lawweb.in/2024/08/supreme-court-all-grounds-that-may-be.html

2) Supreme Court: Appellate court should reappraise the evidence itself and it cannot proceed to dispose of appeal upon appraisal of evidence by the trial court alone

Print Page

Supreme court: Order framing a charge is an interlocutory order

128. In view of the conclusion that the order framing a charge is an interlocutory order within the meaning of Section 11(1), the appeal against such an order is incompetent in view of the provision contained in Section 11(2), and therefore the preliminary objection must be upheld and the appeal 'is dismissed.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 562 of 1979

Decided On: 07.12.1979

V.C. Shukla Vs. State through C.B.I.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

A.P. Sen, D.A. Desai, P.N. Shinghal and S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, JJ.

Authored By : S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, P.N. Shinghal, D.A. Desai

Citations: 1980 AIR 962, 1980 SCR (2) 380,MANU/SC/0284/1979.

Print Page