#Criminal Procedure Code

The Supreme Court held that bail orders ignoring video evidence and failing to record reasons are unsustainable, emphasizing that reasoned decisions are essential to justice. The ruling affects lower courts, mandating detailed reasoning and evidence appreciation in all bail applications.

The SC held that lack of the original forged document does not vitiate framing of charge under Section 227 CrPC if a prima facie case exists. It also applied issue estoppel to bar re-litigation, restoring the criminal trial against the accused.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that when parties settle a Section 138 NI Act complaint, the related proclamation and FIR under Section 290 BNS must be dismissed, resulting in the FIR's quash. This prevents further criminal prosecution once the principal dispute is resolved, safeguarding litigants who reach settlement.

Gujarat HC ruled that the complainant in a cheque-bounce matter is the victim and may file an appeal against an acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, directing the case be transferred to the Sessions Court. This expands the victim’s procedural rights in NI Act prosecutions.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that a Section 319 CrPC application to summon additional accused is permissible only when the trial record contains strong, cogent evidence. Accordingly, it dismissed the petition where the allegation was uncorroborated, tightening the test for summoning extra accused.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ordered regular bail for Gurkirpal Singh, holding that when the prosecution offers no independent evidence, the constitutional guarantee of a speedy trial under Article 21 overrides the stringent bail denial under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. This establishes that speedy-trial rights can prevail over statutory bail restrictions, benefiting accused in drug cases lacking direct proof.

Supreme Court clarifies that interim custody of seized property under CrPC Sections 451 and 457 hinges on prima facie possession, not registration. Vehicles registered in a director’s name were granted to the company in actual possession, setting a precedent for disputes over seized assets.

Allahabad High Court rules that compliance with a compromise agreement, including full payment of maintenance under Section 125(3) CrPC, extinguishes the wife's right to continue litigation. The judgment reinforces that post-payment, proceedings must be quashed to prevent abuse of process, setting a precedent for similar matrimonial disputes.

Kerala High Court rules that separate trials for distinct accused groups do not violate fair trial rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21 if allegations are unrelated. The judgment reinforces that piecemeal trials are permissible where no prejudice is demonstrated, setting a precedent for multi-accused criminal proceedings.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that secured creditors are entitled to police assistance for restoring possession of secured assets if borrowers illegally re-enter after dispossession. The ruling underscores the ministerial duty of authorities under Section 14 SARFAESI Act and prevents borrowers from frustrating statutory recovery mechanisms.

Allahabad High Court sets aside an appeal against acquittal under Section 364 IPC, ruling that family disputes require closer examination of witness credibility and adverse inferences for non-examination of key witnesses. The judgment reinforces that appellate courts must apply stricter evidentiary standards in cases involving familial relationships to prevent miscarriage of justice.

Allahabad High Court dismisses a second quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC, holding that successive petitions for the same FIR are not maintainable unless supported by fresh material or changed circumstances. The ruling reinforces the Supreme Court's precedent in M.C. Ravikumar, limiting abuse of process in criminal proceedings.

Bombay High Court holds that maintenance under Section 125 CrPC cannot exceed a wife's demonstrated needs, especially when she owns assets worth crores. The court stayed a Rs.50,000 monthly order, emphasizing the statutory requirement of 'inability to maintain herself' as a precondition for relief.

Allahabad High Court quashes FIR under Sections 363, 366 IPC, holding no offence where victim, a major, willingly married the accused and had children.

The Allahabad High Court set aside a murder conviction after finding that the trial court violated Section 313 CrPC by not confronting the accused with the viscera report-a material piece of evidence. The ruling underscores that procedural compliance under Section 313 is non-negotiable, and its breach irreparably vitiates the trial, regardless of the offence's gravity.