Sahayata & Sahayata

Punishment-Focused MCQs (Q46–Q60) — based on the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 . These focus on minimum/maximum punishments, sentencing discretion, and unique provisions for punishment under BNS. ⚖️ BNS 2023 – Punishment-Based MCQs (Set 4: Q46–Q60) 46. A person is convicted under Section 248 for making a false charge with intent to injure. What is the maximum punishment? (A) 2 years (B) 5 years (C) 7 years (D) 10 years 47. Which of the following offences mandates minimum imprisonment of 10 years ? (A) Acid attack (B) Kidnapping for ransom (C) Rape of minor (D) All of the above 48. In default of payment of fine only , the maximum imprisonment term awarded must not exceed: (A) 1/4 of the term of substantive sentence (B) What court deems just and proper (C) Prescribed maximum in the Code (D) One year 49. Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from duty (Section 121) is punishable with: (A) Up to 2 years (B) Up to 3 years (C) Up to 5 years and fine (...

  Legal Re-Examination or Abuse of Procedure? A Deep Dive into Chekka Suryanarayana vs. Saka Rajulamma (2021) Image credit: Unsplash ⚖️ Introduction In the legal world, timing is everything — especially when it comes to procedural steps like recalling witnesses. The judgment in Chekka Suryanarayana vs. Saka Rajulamma delivered by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh on September 3, 2021 , explores the delicate balance between ensuring justice and preventing procedural misuse. 📝 Case Snapshot Case Title : Chekka Suryanarayana vs. Saka Rajulamma Citation : Civil Revision Petition No. 472 of 2021 Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh Presiding Judge : Hon'ble Justice D. Ramesh Order Date : 03.09.2021 Primary Legal Provision : Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC 📚 Background The petitioner challenged an order passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, which allowed recalling of PW1 (a witness) for further cross-examination, after the concl...

 Revisiting the Stand: Recalling Witnesses under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC Introduction In civil litigation, the examination of witnesses is crucial. But what happens if a witness needs to be recalled after their examination is over? Order 18 Rule 17 CPC empowers the court to recall a witness at any stage before judgment , not to fill in gaps but to clarify any ambiguity in their testimony. This power is discretionary and judicial , not a right of the parties. 📚 Legal Provision: Order 18 Rule 17 CPC “The Court may at any stage of a suit recall any witness who has been examined and may (subject to the law of evidence) put such questions to him as the Court thinks fit.” Nature : Discretionary power of the court. Objective : Clarification of doubts that the court may have—not to help either party. Stage : Can be exercised at any time before pronouncement of judgment . ⚖️ Leading Judgments ✅ K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy (2011) 11 SCC 275 Principle : Parties d...

  Here is a summary of the Supreme Court judgment in Indian Evangelical Lutheran Church Trust Association vs. Sri Bala & Co. , Civil Appeal No. 1525 of 2023, decided on January 8, 2025 , along with the key legal principles and relevant precedents cited: 🧾 Summary of the Judgment The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and rejected the plaint in the second suit filed by the respondent (plaintiff) under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC on the ground that it was barred by limitation . The first suit for specific performance based on a 1991 sale agreement was filed in 1993 but was rejected in 1998 due to non-payment of court fees. The second suit was filed in 2007 , relying on Order VII Rule 13 CPC (which permits a fresh suit after rejection), and claimed extension of the agreement based on a 1991 letter. The Supreme Court held that the second suit was filed well beyond the limitation period under Article 113 of the Limitation Act , which provides three years from the da...

Anant Construction (P) Ltd. vs Ram Niwas (1994) — Delhi HC on Replications and Judicial Delay 📌 Citation: 1994 IV AD (Delhi) 185 | 1994 (31) DRJ 205 | 1995 RLR 20 Court: Delhi High Court (Original Side) Judge: Justice R.C. Lahoti 🧑‍⚖️ Brief Background: A suit for specific performance filed in 1982 dragged on for over a decade, largely due to repeated and unnecessary replications and rejoinders —documents that added no substantial value but delayed the trial. The Court took the opportunity to deliver a landmark clarification on the correct practice and legal basis of filing such pleadings. ⚖️ Legal Issue: Whether the routine practice of filing replications to every written statement or interlocutory application is valid under law, or merely a procedural misuse contributing to delay in justice. 🧑‍🏫 Law Declared by the Court: Justice Lahoti provided a comprehensive judicial exposition on the subject: ✅ What is a Replication ? A replication is a reply by the plaintiff to ne...

Top Learning for Lawyers and Law Students from Nani Palkhivala, Jurist Nani Palkhivala, one of India's most revered jurists, was known for his sharp legal mind, eloquence, and in-depth understanding of the law. His life and career offer numerous lessons for aspiring lawyers and law students. Here are some key takeaways: 1. Master the Basics: Palkhivala's legal career was built on a strong foundation of understanding the basics of law. He believed that a thorough understanding of the core principles is essential before tackling complex legal issues. For law students, mastering fundamental subjects such as constitutional law, contracts, and torts is crucial. Lesson : "Get your fundamentals right; everything else will follow." 2. The Power of Constitutional Law: Palkhivala’s most significant contributions were in the realm of constitutional law. He was instrumental in arguing landmark cases like the Keshavananda Bharati case , which upheld the basic str...

Interpleader Suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 An interpleader suit is a legal action where a person (the plaintiff) who is holding property or money (disputed) is uncertain about the rightful claimant(s) to the property or money and seeks the court's assistance in determining the rightful owner. This suit is governed by Order 35 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908 . 1. Definition of Interpleader Suit: An interpleader suit is filed by a person who is in possession of a property or money but is faced with competing claims from multiple parties, and the person holding the property or money wishes to be relieved from the responsibility of deciding who is rightfully entitled to it. 2. Sections under CPC Related to Interpleader Suit: The procedure for filing an interpleader suit is prescribed under Order 35 of the CPC . The relevant provisions under this Order are: Order 35, Rule 1: The plaintiff can file an interpleader suit when two or more people...

Overview: Jeremy Hutchinson’s Case Histories is a fascinating account of one of Britain’s most celebrated barristers of the 20th century, Jeremy Hutchinson QC. The book, authored by Thomas Grant QC, narrates some of Hutchinson’s most high-profile and controversial trials—from defending art, literature, and freedom of speech to tackling political and espionage cases. It’s not just a legal history, but also a moral and cultural commentary on post-war Britain, reflecting how law interacts with evolving norms of decency, liberty, and justice. Key Case Studies in the Book: R v Penguin Books Ltd (1960) – The Lady Chatterley’s Lover trial Landmark obscenity case under the Obscene Publications Act 1959. Hutchinson's defence helped shape modern freedom of expression in literature. R v Christine Keeler – Profumo Affair Explored themes of morality, public deception, and political fallout. Hutchinson’s cross-examinations exposed state hypocrisy. R ...

  Summary Procedure under CPC (Order XXXVII) I. Objective Speedy disposal of suits where the defendant is unlikely to have a real defence. To prevent unreasonable obstruction by defendants. Defendant cannot defend the suit as a matter of right; he must seek leave to defend within 10 days of service of summons. II. Scope and Applicability Applicable to: High Courts, City Civil Courts, Courts of Small Causes , and other notified courts. Types of suits: Bills of exchange, hundis, promissory notes . Suits for recovery of debt or liquidated demand : Arising from written contracts , Enactments where a fixed sum is recoverable (other than penalty), Guarantees where claim is against principal debtor. III. Distinction from Ordinary Suit Ordinary Suit Summary Suit Defendant has a right to defend. Defendant needs leave of court to defend. Decree can be set aside only by review. Decree can be set aside by showing special circumstances . ...