Sahayata & Sahayata

  📌 Case Title Bernard Lyngdoh Phawa v. State of Meghalaya Criminal Appeal No. 3738 of 2023 Decision Date: 27 January 2026 🔍 Background of the Case The case arose from a missing person complaint that later led to the discovery of a dead body buried in a graveyard. The prosecution alleged kidnapping, murder, and destruction of evidence based on: “Last seen together” theory Recovery of body and rope Alleged ransom calls Seizure of belongings of the deceased Confessional statements under Section 164 CrPC The Trial Court acquitted the accused, holding that the chain of circumstantial evidence was incomplete. However, the High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted the accused for murder (Section 302 IPC) and causing disappearance of evidence (Section 201 IPC). ⚖️ Issues Before the Supreme Court Whether the High Court was justified in reversing a well-reasoned acquittal Whether conviction could be sustained on uncorroborated confessional statements Whether the prosecution prove...

  Brief Note on Admission/Denial of Documents (Relevant Section – BNSS/CrPC) 330/294 Key Provisions: Filing of Document List : The prosecution or accused must submit a list of documents they propose to rely on. The opposite party must be called upon to admit or deny the genuineness of each document. Time Limit : Admission or denial must be done within 30 days from the date of supply of documents . Court may extend this period by recording reasons in writing . Expert Reports : No expert shall be summoned unless the report is disputed by either party. Form of List : The State Government may prescribe the format for the list of documents. Evidentiary Value : If the genuineness is not disputed , the document may be read in evidence without formal proof. The Court may still require proof of signature if it deems necessary. ⚖️ Objective: To streamline the trial process , avoid unnecessary proof of undisputed documents, an...

Summary of the Case: Seetaben Laghdhirbhai vs The State of Gujarat (16 January 2025) Background of the Case The case revolves around the abduction and sexual assault of a minor victim (PW8) by Accused No.1 on 24th April 2008. The prosecution alleged that Accused No.3 (appellant – Seetaben Laghdhirbhai) and Accused No.4 (her husband) aided and abetted Accused No.1 by providing shelter and preventing the victim from leaving. The charges included Sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (procuration of minor girl), 376 (rape), 212 (harboring an offender), and 114 (abettor present at the time of crime) of the IPC . Trial Court & High Court Judgments Accused No.1 was convicted under Sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC . The appellant (Seetaben) and her husband (Accused No.4) were convicted under Section 212 read with Section 114 IPC and Section 114 read with Section 376 IPC for allegedly aiding Accused No.1. The High Court upheld the conviction. Supreme Court’s Analysis and Judgm...

summary of the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in Sharif Ahmed & Another v. State of U.P. & Another [Criminal Appeal No. 2357 of 2024, decided on 01.05.2024], along with key insights , law laid down , relevant statutory provisions , and case laws referred: 🧾 Key Issue: Whether a chargesheet that lacks detailed facts and relevant evidence satisfies the requirements of Section 173(2) CrPC, and if not, whether cognizance and summoning based on such chargesheets is valid. 🧠 Key Insights & Law Laid Down: Incomplete Chargesheets Cannot Be Supplemented Under Section 173(8): A chargesheet must be complete under Section 173(2) , with sufficient material for cognizance and trial. Section 173(8) (further investigation) can’t be used to make up for or "repair" an incomplete chargesheet. Essentials of a Valid Chargesheet: Must include all required details: names of parties, nature of information, witnesses, whether offences are made out and by whom,...

Supreme Court Judgment Summary: Biswajyoti Chatterjee vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. Criminal Appeal (SLP (Crl.) No. 4261 of 2024) | Decided on 07 April 2025 Key Facts: Appellant: Biswajyoti Chatterjee, a retired Civil Judge (Senior Division), City Civil Court, Calcutta. Respondent No. 2: A woman who alleged that Chatterjee promised to marry her, maintained a relationship with her, and later abandoned her after her divorce. FIR filed on 14.12.2015 under Sections 376 (rape), 417 (cheating), and 506 (criminal intimidation) IPC . Allegations include: Promise to marry after her divorce. Financial support for her and her son. Sexual relationship allegedly based on promise of marriage. Threats after she tried to contact him post-divorce. Lower Court Proceedings: Anticipatory Bail: Granted by Calcutta High Court in 2016. Charge Sheet: Filed in 2020 by CID, West Bengal. Discharge Application: Dismissed by Sessions Court and later by Calcutta...

The article discusses a Supreme Court ruling regarding a criminal appeal by Kanishk Sinha and his wife, who are involved in two cases of forgery and fraud. Here are the main points: Case Background : Kanishk Sinha and his wife face allegations of cheating and conspiracy in two criminal cases, initiated by different complainants. Legal Proceedings : The appellants sought revisions in the Calcutta High Court concerning the dismissal of their complaints. Their argument was based on a prior Supreme Court ruling requiring complaints under Section 156(3) CrPC to be supported by an affidavit. High Court Ruling : The High Court determined that the affidavit requirement from the Supreme Court ruling is prospective and does not apply to the appellants' earlier cases from 2010-2011. Retrospective vs. Prospective Law : The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision, stating that judicial interpretations usually have retrospective effects unless otherwise noted, thus supporting the ap...