Read Time: 14 minutes

1. Keywords: Section 319, Criminal Procedure Code, discretionary power, guilty persons, powers to proceed against other persons
   [Section 319 CrPC] The Supreme Court has reiterated that the power given under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) is a discretionary and extraordinary power which should be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant. Section 319 of CrPC gives power to a Court to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of an offence.
   Bench: Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S Oka
   Case Title: Sagar v. State of UP and Anr. 
   Click here to read more
    
2. Keywords: Section 394, Criminal Procedure Code, abatement of appeal, Amicus Curiae, deceased appellant
   [Section 394 CrCP] The Supreme Court disposed of an appeal as 'having abated' while noting that counsel appearing as an Amicus Curiae appointed by the Court on behalf of the deceased appellant(convict) could not be treated as his/her near relative under the provision of Section 394 the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. As per Section 394 of CrPC, on the death of the appellant/convict, the appeal is to abate. However, the proviso to the section carries an exception to the effect that a near relative may, within thirty days of the death of the appellant/convict, apply to the Appellate Court for leave to continue the appeal.
   Bench: Justices Vineet Saran and Aniruddha Bose 
   Case Title: Yeruva Sayireddy v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
   Click here to read more
    
3. Keywords: Inter-Commissionerate Transfers, family life, gender quality, Central government, government employees, transfers, Article 21, constitutional values  
   [Inter-Commissionerate Transfers] The Supreme Court has remarked that the State while formulating a policy for its own employees has to give due consideration to the importance of protecting family life as an element of the dignity of the person and a postulate of privacy.  With this view the Court requested the Union of India to revisit its policy relating to transfers in the tax department. "How a particular policy should be modulated to take into account the necessities of maintaining family life may be left at the threshold to be determined by the State. In crafting its policy however, the State cannot be heard to say that it will be oblivious to basic constitutional values, including the preservation of family life which is an incident of Article 21", observed the court.
   Bench: Justices DY Chandrachud and Vikram Nath
   Case Title: SK Nausad Rahaman & Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
   Click here to read more
    
4. Keywords: Order 41 Rule 27, Civil Procedure Code, interest of justice, additional evidence, allowed on record, doubt, appellate court 
   [Additional Evidence] The Top Court has held that where the additional evidence sought to be adduced before an appellate court removes the cloud of doubt over the case and the evidence has a direct and important bearing on the main issue in the suit and interest of justice clearly renders it imperative that it may be allowed to be permitted on record, such application to bring such evidence on record may be allowed. While clarifying that as per the general principle, the appellate court should not travel outside the record of the lower court and cannot take any evidence in appeal, the court referred to an exception, i.e., Order 41 Rule 27 CPC which enables the appellate court to take additional evidence in exceptional circumstances.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: Sanjay Kumar Singh v. The State of Jharkhand
   Click here to read more
    
5. Keywords: Mesne profit, suit property, market value of property, current potential, residential property, commercial premises, CPC
   [Mesne Profit] The Supreme Court has remarked that the market rate as per the current potential of the suit property should be considered while deciding on the amount of mesne profits to be granted to the property owner. In a case where while reducing the amount of mesne profits, the Rajasthan High Court weighed in that the premises was residential, being used for residential purposes and the construction was about 100 years old and that the report of the approved valuer was with respect to commercial premises, the top court disagreed with the High Court's decision of reducing the mesne profits to 50% terming it to be a 'mechanical' approach.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title:  Anar Devi (D) through LR v. Vasudev Mangal Etc. Etc.
   Click here to read more
    
6. Keywords: common intention, prosecution, established fact, use of weapon, causing injury, Section 34, Indian Penal code
   [Common Intention] The Supreme Court has observed that once it has been established and proved by the prosecution that all the accused came at the place of incident with a common intention to kill the deceased and as such, they shared the common intention, in that case it is immaterial whether any of the accused who shared the common intention had used any weapon or not and/or any of them caused any injury on the deceased or not. 
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: State of M.P. v. Ramji Lal Sharma & Anr.
   Click here to read more
    
7. Keywords: cancelled bail, threatening witness, Section 302 IPC
   [Bail] The Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to a lawyer practicing in Ballia, Uttar Pradesh after noting that he had already been convicted and sentenced for imprisonment for life under Sections 302 and 506, IPC in an earlier FIR No. 467/1998 and had made endeavours to threaten the witnesses with dire consequences. After hearing a criminal appeal filed by one Nitesh Kumar Singh, the court of said, "The plea which we seek to examine is whether in the given factual scenario we should take the path, which we would normally be reluctant to choose, of cancelling the bail already granted by the High Court."
   Bench: Justices SK Kaul and MM Sundresh
   Case Title: Nitesh Kumar Singh v. State of UP & Anr.
   Click here to read more
    
8. Keywords: planted witness, eye witness, interested witness, injured eye-witness, relatives of deceased, deposition, evidence, evidentiary value
   [Interested witnesses] While disregarding an observation that the eyewitnesses were planted witnesses merely on the ground that they were all interested witnesses being relatives of the deceased, the Top Court has said, "Merely because the witnesses were the relatives of the deceased, their evidence cannot be discarded solely on the aforesaid ground." The Court further noted that PW-6 being an injured eye-witness, his presence ought not to have been doubted and being an injured eye-witness, as per the settled proposition of law laid down by the Court in catena of decisions, his deposition has a greater reliability and credibility.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: M. Nageswara Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
   Click here to read more