Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

“High Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Against National-Level Shooter, Cites Lack of Prima Facie Case”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Delhi High Court has quashed a criminal complaint filed against Disha Langan, a national-level shooter and law student, under Sections 132 and 135(1)(a) and (b) of The Customs Act, 1962. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee on August 18, 2023, has attracted attention for its meticulous examination of the case and its implications.

The petitioner, Disha Langan, had challenged the summoning order Issued by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, which was based on allegations of smuggling arms and ammunition. The court’s observations highlighted the uniqueness of the case, where the petitioner’s license was used by her father for importing firearms from Slovenia. The judgment underscored the importance of carefully considering the sufficiency of grounds for issuing summons, stating that the court should not proceed mechanically in such matters.

“Execution of law without appropriate acquaintance with legal provisions and comprehensive sense of their application may result in an innocent being prosecuted,” the court observed, emphasizing the serious consequences that a summoning order carries. It noted that the case against Disha Langan was based on assumptions and presumptions, which were not sufficient to sustain the allegations.

The court's decision also delved Into the concept of vicarious liability under criminal law, asserting that such liability was impermissible. It highlighted that the petitioner, a bright young woman of 26 years, should not be held responsible for her father’s actions solely based on the use of her license.

The judgment, which discussed sections of The Customs Act, 1962, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and various legal precedents, ultimately concluded that there was no prima facie case against the petitioner. The court quashed the criminal complaint against Disha Langan, allowing her to continue pursuing her studies and shooting aspirations without the shadow of alleged offences.

This ruling not only provides relief to Disha Langan but also reiterates the need for a balanced and thoughtful approach in summoning orders, recognizing the potential consequences they entail.

Date of Decision:   August 18, 2023 

DISHA LANGAN vs  DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE  

Similar News