Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

"High Court Sets Precedent: Unwarranted Police Summons and Warrants Quashed, Judicial Restraint Emphasized"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Delhi High Court has firmly set aside orders issued by a Sessions Judge that unjustly summoned senior police officials, including the issuance of bailable warrants against the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime). This significant ruling, dated 22nd December 2023, emphasizes the need for judicial restraint and adherence to the principles of independence within the justice system.

The judgment, delivered by Justice Amit Bansal, articulated the importance of maintaining respect for the independent roles of different entities within the legal framework. In the case of State (NCT Of Delhi) Through Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime-III, Delhi vs. Shadab, the Court noted, "Delay in obtaining FSL reports in a timely manner would not tantamount to negligence on behalf of the Police Authorities" [Para 16]. This statement underscores the acknowledgement of the Forensic Science Laboratory’s (FSL) independence and the limited role police officials play in influencing FSL processes.

Highlighting the impact of such unwarranted judicial orders on police functioning, the Court remarked on the necessity of "judicial restraint in this regard" [Para 19]. The routine summoning of high-ranking police officials and issuing of bailable warrants were criticized for negatively affecting their duties and tarnishing their reputation.

In a critical observation addressing the issue of repeated violations of judicial directives, the Court ordered the sending of a copy of the judgment to the Inspection Committee, suggesting a need for oversight and action. The Court’s decision serves as a stark reminder of the boundaries within which judicial and law enforcement authorities operate, and the importance of respecting these boundaries for the effective functioning of the justice system.

Furthermore, the Court directed that the judgment be circulated among all judicial officers in Delhi. This directive is aimed at sensitizing them to the critical importance of judicial restraint and discipline in their orders, especially when dealing with police officials.

This ruling sets a precedent for future cases and is expected to have a lasting impact on the relationship between the judiciary and law enforcement agencies, fostering a more harmonious and respectful interaction based on mutual understanding of each entity’s role and limitations within the legal system.

Date on: 22nd December 2023 

 

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) VS SHADAB

Latest Legal News