List of Current Affairs

Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Recently a division bench of Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court.

• The Supreme Court heard this in the case of Sakhawat v. The State of Uttar Pradesh.

What is the Background of Sakhawat v. The State of Uttar Pradesh Case?

• The appellant was convicted of murder and attempt to murder, though was later released on bail.
• However, while hearing his appeal, the High Court found the prosecution’s case reliable enough to dismiss the appeal and cancelled the bail of the appellant.
• Hence, the appellant approached SC.
• The SC Registry called for the soft copy of the record of the Trial Court.
• SC ordered that the soft copies thereof be provided to the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

What were the Court’s Directions?

• SC said the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners shall place on record the printed version of all the depositions of the prosecution witnesses and other relevant documents.
• The court further said that it will be appropriate if the Registry of this Court stops referring to the Trial Courts as ‘Lower Courts’.
  • Even record of the Trial Court should not be referred to as Lower Court Record (LCR). Instead, it should be referred to as the Trial Court Record (TCR).
• The court directed that the Registrar (Judicial) to take note of this order. A copy of this order be sent to him.

What is the Hierarchy of Criminal Courts in India?

• Supreme Court of India:
  • SC is not literally covered under hierarchy of criminal courts mentioned under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) however, it is indirectly mentioned under Section 2 (e) (iii) that SC court is the highest court for criminal appeal.
  • The appeal to SC can be preferred under Section 374 and 379 CrPC.
  • It has appellate jurisdiction over high courts and can hear appeals against judgments of high courts in criminal matters.
• High Courts:
  • HC is defined under Section 2 (e) of the CrPC.
  • Classes of Criminal Courts under Section 6 of CrPC also mention HC.
  • HCs have original and appellate jurisdiction over subordinate courts within their respective states.
  • They can hear appeals against the judgments of subordinate courts within their jurisdiction.
  • HCs also have the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals functioning within their territorial jurisdiction.
• Sessions Courts:
  • Sessions courts are established in every district or group of districts under Section 9 of CrPC.
  • Under Section 28 (2) of the CrPC, a Sessions Judge may pass any sentence authorized by law; but any sentence of death passed by any such Judge shall be subject to confirmation by the High Court.
• Additional Sessions Judge / Assistant Sessions Judge:
  • Additional Sessions Judges and Assistant Sessions Judges are appointed by the High Court under Section 9 (3) of the CrPC.
  • They assist the Sessions Judge in the discharge of his/her duties.
  • Additional Sessions Judge has the same powers as the Sessions Judge.
  • Under Section 28 (3) of the CrPC, an Assistant Sessions Judge may pass any sentence authorised by law except a sentence of death or of imprisonment for life or of imprisonment for a term exceeding ten years.
• Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) / Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM):
  • These magistrates are appointed for each district or metropolitan area.
  • Under Section 29 (1) of the CrPC, Court of a Chief Judicial Magistrate may pass any sentence authorised by law except a sentence of death or of imprisonment for life or of imprisonment for a term exceeding seven years.
  • Section 29 (4) of CrPC states that, the Court of a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate shall have the powers of the Court of a Chief Judicial Magistrate.
• Judicial Magistrates of First Class/Metropolitan Magistrate:
  • These magistrates are also appointed for each district or metropolitan area.
  • Under Section 29 (1) of the CrPC they handle cases involving offences punishable with imprisonment of up to three years, as well as other cases that are less serious in nature.
  • Section 29 (4) of CrPC states that the Court of a Metropolitan Magistrate shall have the powers of the Court of a JMFC.
• Judicial Magistrates of Second Class:
  • These magistrates are appointed for specific areas within a district.
  • Under Section 29 (3) of the CrPC the Court of Magistrate of the second class may pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, or of fine not exceeding five thousand rupees, or of both.

Source: Bombay High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Bombay High Court in the matter of Bansilal S. Kabra v. Global Trade Finance Limited & Anr., has held that when a Magistrate is conducting a mandatory inquiry under the provisions of Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) before summoning an accused living beyond jurisdiction, the Magistrate shouldn't solely rely on the allegations in the private complaint.

What was the Background of Bansilal S. Kabra v. Global Trade Finance Limited & Anr. Case?

• In this case, the Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay, and Justices Bharati Dangre & Arif Doctor were dealing with the issue that whether an inquiry under Section 202(1) of the CrPC is mandatory before summoning an accused residing outside the court's jurisdiction, especially when the accused is residing in another city or state.
• The Court passed the order while disposing of an old reference as divergent views were taken by single judges of the Bombay High Court in 2009 & 2010.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The bench comprising of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay, and Justices Bharati Dangre & Arif Doctor observed that when a Magistrate is conducting a mandatory inquiry under Section 202(1) of CrPC before summoning an accused who lives outside the court's jurisdiction, the Magistrate shouldn't solely rely on the allegations in the private complaint as it can be used as an instrument of vendetta.
• It was held that the Magistrate should undertake a deeper examination after recording the complainant or witness's statement on oath, and documentary evidence to ascertain if there are sufficient grounds to issue process against the accused.
• The Court further held that the vindication of majesty of justice and maintenance of law and order in the Society, being the primary object of criminal justice, would not bring within its sweep a personal vengeance.

What is Section 202 of CrPC?

About:

• This Section deals with the examination of complainant. It states that—

A Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence on complaint shall examine upon oath the complainant and the witnesses present, if any, and the substance of such examination shall be reduced to writing and shall be signed by the complainant and the witnesses, and also by the Magistrate.

Provided that, when the complaint is made in writing, the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses—

(a) If a public servant acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties or a Court has made the complaint; or

(b) If the Magistrate makes the case for inquiry or trial to another Magistrate under section 192.

Provided further that if the Magistrate makes over the case to another Magistrate under section 192 after examining the complainant and the witnesses, the latter Magistrate need not re-examine them.

Objectives:

• To enable the Magistrate to carefully scrutinize the allegations made in the complaint with a view to prevent a person named therein, as accused, from being called upon to face unnecessary, frivolous or meritless complaint.
• To find out whether there is any material in existence to support the allegations in the complaint.

Case Law:

• In Mohinder Singh v. Gulwant Singh (1992) , the Supreme Court held that the scope of enquiry under Section 202 is extremely restricted only to finding out the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint in order to determine whether process should issue or not under Section 204 of the Code or whether the complaint should be dismissed by resorting to Section 203 of the Code on the footing that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding on the basis of the statements of the complainant and of his witnesses, if any.

Source: Madras High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Madras High Court in the matter of S Gurumoorthi v. State has held that the right to attend the funeral falls under the ambit Article 25 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI).

What was the Background of S Gurumoorthi v. State Case?

• The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13^th June 2023 for the offences under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
• The petitioner's father passed away on 10^th Feb 2024.
• The petitioner wanting to participate in the funeral rites applied for an interim bail before the High Court of Madras.
• The High Court was not in favor of interim bail. The court, however, was also mindful of the petitioner's fundamental rights.
• The High Court also noted that a dead person was also entitled to a dignified burial which would involve the participation of close relatives.
• Thus, the Court directed the Superintendent, of Central Prison, Madurai to make appropriate arrangements allowing the petitioner’s to attend his father’s funeral.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Justice GR Swaminathan observed that the prisoners including under-trials can invoke this right under Article 25 of the COI. The right to participate in the funeral ceremony of the parent/spouse/child will fall within the sweep of the right under Article 25. Of course, this cannot be an absolute right. The Court will uphold this right subject to the prevailing situation.
• It was further held that Article 25 could be invoked by any person and did not make any distinction between free persons and prisoners. The Court also noted that the prisoner, being a Hindu had to discharge certain religious obligations In this case, there are no such special circumstances warranting denial of the rights.

What is Article 25 of the COI?

About:

• This Article deals with the freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion. It states that-

(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion.

(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law -

(a) Regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice.

(b) Providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.

Explanation I - The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion

Explanation II - In sub clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.

• It covers not only religious beliefs but also religious practices.
• These rights are available to all persons—citizens as well as non-citizens.

Case Law

• In the case of Commr. HRE v. Sri L.T. Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt (1954), the Supreme Court observed that Article 25 of the COI secures to every person a freedom not only to entertain such religious belief, as may be approved of by his judgment and conscience but also to exhibit his belief in such outward acts as he thinks proper and to propagate or disseminate his ideas for the edification of others.