Lethargy Is Not an Exceptional Circumstance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Striking Off of Defence for Delay in Filing Written Statement Vague Decree of Injunction Can’t Be Executed by Attaching Machines: Rajasthan High Court Strikes Down Execution Order Mere permission to join proceedings without allowing filing of written statement is illusory: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Proceedings Unregistered Power of Attorney Can’t Transfer Property: MP High Court Denies Title, Dismisses Ejectment Suit Mere Non-Recovery of Weapon Is Not Fatal When Circumstantial and Medical Evidence Prove Guilt Beyond Doubt: Allahabad High Court Failure to Examine Gazetted Officer and Magistrate Who Certified Seizure Goes to Root of Fair Trial Under NDPS Act : Calcutta High Court Tender Years Doctrine Is No Longer Good Law: Delhi High Court Slams Mother’s Custody Claim Built on Parental Alienation Negation of Bail is the Rule in NDPS Cases Involving Commercial Quantity: Himachal Pradesh High Court Denies Bail Single Stab Injury in Heat of Passion During Sudden Quarrel Is Not Murder: Kerala High Court Section 10 CPC Inapplicable To Labour Court Proceedings; Stay Of Individual Disputes Denied: Karnataka High Court 138 NI Act | Once Issuance and Signature on Cheque Are Admitted, Burden Shifts on Accused to Dislodge Statutory Presumption: Madras High Court Confession Cannot Substitute Proof: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Convicted of Wife’s Murder "Sole Eyewitness Testimony, Corroborated by Medical and Recovery Evidence, Is Enough to Sustain Conviction Under Section 302 IPC: Allahabad High Court Partition Once Effected Cannot Be Reopened on Vague Allegations of Fraud: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Registered Family Partition Deed Cancellation of Land Acquisition Compensation Without Allegation or Hearing Is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Restores Compensation to Innocent Land Owner Whether Act Was in Discharge of Official Duty Is a Question of Fact — Magistrate, Not High Court, Must Decide: Supreme Court Restricts Writ Interference in BNSS Cases Section 175(4) BNSS | Affidavit Is Not Optional — Even Complaints Against Public Servants Must Follow Procedural Rigour: Supreme Court Magistrate Cannot Be Directed to Recall His Judicial Order by a Writ Court: Supreme Court Warns Against Article 226 Interference in Pending Criminal Proceedings Even In Absence of Written Demand, If Substantial Dispute Exists or Is Apprehended, Reference Under Section 10 ID Act Is Valid: Supreme Court Absence of Classical Signs of Strangulation and Possibility of Hanging Nullifies Homicidal Theory: Supreme Court Holds Medical Evidence Alone Cannot Prove Guilt Confession Must Be Direct Acknowledgment of Guilt, Not Mere Presence at Scene: Supreme Court Slams Misuse of Section 164 CrPC Reversal of Acquittal Without Dislodging Trial Court’s Reasoning Is Impermissible: Supreme Court Restores Acquittal

"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