Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Mere Entry, Abuse Or Assault Is Not Civil Contempt – Willfulness And Dispossession Must Be Clearly Proved: Bombay High Court Magistrate Cannot Shut Eyes To Final Report After Cognizance – Supplementary Report Must Be Judicially Considered Before Framing Charges: Allahabad High Court Examination-in-Chief Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction Amid Serious Doubts: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Cannot Reclaim Absolute Ownership After Letting Your Declaration Suit Fail: AP High Court Enforces Finality in Partition Appeal Death Due to Fat Embolism and Delayed Treatment Is Not Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Converts 30-Year-Old 304 Part-I Conviction to Grievous Hurt Fabricated Lease Cannot Be Sanctified by Consolidation Entry: Orissa High Court Dismisses 36-Year-Old Second Appeal Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Sentence Cannot Be Reduced to Two Months for Four Life-Threatening Stab Wounds: Supreme Court Restores 3-Year RI in Attempt to Murder Case Suspicion, However Grave, Cannot Substitute Proof: Apex Court Reaffirms Limits of Section 106 IEA Accused at the Time of the Statement Was Not in the Custody of the Police - Discovery Statement Held Inadmissible Under Section 27: Supreme Court Failure to Explain What Happened After ‘Last Seen Together’ Becomes an Additional Link: Supreme Court Strengthens Section 106 Evidence Act Doctrine Suicide in a Pact Is Conditional Upon Mutual Participation — Survivor’s Resolve Reinforces the Act: Supreme Court Affirms Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Participation in Draw Does Not Cure Illegality: Supreme Court Rejects Estoppel in Arbitrary Flat Allotment Case Nepotism and Self-Aggrandizement Are Anathema to a Democratic System: Supreme Court Quashes Allotment of Super Deluxe Flats by Government Employees’ Welfare Society Liberty Is Not Absolute When It Becomes a Threat to Society: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Alleged ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Mastermind Magistrate’s Power Is Limited — Sessions Court May Yet Try the Case: Supreme Court Corrects High Court’s Misconception in ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Bail Order Dacoity Cannot Be Presumed, It Must Be Proved: Allahabad High Court Acquits Villagers After 43 Years, Citing ‘Glaring Lapses’ in Prosecution Case When the Judge Signs with the Prosecutor, Justice Is Already Compromised: MP High Court Quashes Tainted Medical College Enquiry Strict Rules Of Evidence Do Not Apply To Proceedings Before The Family Court: Kerala High Court Upholds Wife’s Claim For Gold And Money Commission Workers Cannot Claim Status of Civil Servants: Gujarat High Court Declines Regularization of Physically Challenged Case-Paper Operators Non-Wearing of Helmet Had a Direct Nexus with Fatal Head Injuries  : Madras High Court Upholds 25% Contributory Negligence for Helmet Violation Only a ‘Person Aggrieved’ Can Prosecute Defamation – Political Party Must Be Properly Represented: Karnataka High Court Quashes Case Against Rahul Gandhi

"Justice has nothing to do with what goes on in the courtroom; Justice is what comes out of a courtroom," Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India set aside the High Court's verdict convicting Munna Pandey in a rape and murder case involving a 10-year-old girl. The bench consisting of Hon'ble Justices B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, and Prashant Kumar Mishra raised serious concerns about the "serious lapses in the investigation" and the "inadequate 313 examination of the accused."

In their observation, the Court emphasized, "justice is not merely about courtroom proceedings but about the outcome that ensures truth and fairness," thereby remitting the case for a fresh trial.

The Court scrutinized the glaring shortcomings in the investigation, such as the failure to obtain a Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report, lack of medical examinations of the accused, and absence of DNA profiling evidence, which were vital in a case of such severe nature.

Besides, the Court stressed the role of a judge in a fair trial, stating that judges "are not mere spectators or recording machines but play an active role in questioning witnesses, seeking relevant information, and upholding the pursuit of truth and justice."

The bench also criticized the High Court's approach in making assumptions regarding the appellant being the sole perpetrator, neglecting the presence of a co-accused and other significant evidence.

Notably, the Court laid great emphasis on the concept of a fair trial, stating it to be "deeply rooted in history, enshrined in the Constitution, and embodied in criminal trial statutes." It underlined the importance of "impartiality and fairness of all parties involved," especially in cases involving capital punishment.

The apex court urged the High Court to expedite the case, considering the appellant's long incarceration, and even suggested appointing legal representation for the appellant if necessary.

This ruling has drawn attention to the critical aspects of criminal procedure, the necessity for a meticulous investigation, and the indispensable role of the judiciary in upholding justice and fairness.

Date of Decision: 04 September 2023

MUNNA PANDEY  vs STATE OF BIHAR          

Latest Legal News