TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION MUST BE DECIDED BY TRIAL COURT, PLEA TO TRANSFER CHEQUE BOUNCE CASE DISMISSED: SUPREME COURT
Case Name: M/S Kamal Enterprises Vs. A. K. Constructions Co.
The court stated that a claim about “lack of territorial jurisdiction” cannot be a reason to transfer cases. This issue must be raised before the Trial Court and the magistrate has the authority to decide whether that court has jurisdiction as per section 201 of the CrPC . A higher court cannot entertain such requests.
Legal Provisions:
- Section 201 , Code of Criminal Procedure- Procedure by magistrate not competent to take cognizance of the case.
Source: SUPREME COURT
VICTIM’S TESTIMONY IN CASE OF SEXUAL ABUSE CANNOT BE DOUBTED JUST BECAUSE HE SMOKED: KERALA HIGH COURT
Case Name: Abdul Salam Vs. State Of Kerala & Connected Matter.
The Kerala High Court dismissed the appeal of two men who were sentenced to 3 years imprisonment for committing an offence under section 377 of IPC for sexually abusing a minor boy of 16 years while stating that the testimony of the victim won’t become unreliable merely because he smoked.
Legal Provisions:
- Section 377, Indian Penal Code-Unnatural offences.
Source: KERALA HIGH COURT
LONG INCARCERATION NOT A VALID REASON TO GRANT BAIL IN CASES OF TERRORISM: DELHI HIGH COURT
Case Name: Joginder Singh @ Joginder Rana Vs. NIA
The Court ruled that being in jail for a long time is not a valid reason to grant bail, especially in serious cases involving terrorism.The court emphasized that while everyone has a right to a fair and speedy trial , granting bail in such cases must be considered carefully as it may threaten national security.
Legal Provisions:
- Sections 17,18, 18B and 39 -Unlawful Activities (prevention) Act,1967
- Sections 120B, 384, 386 and 387 -Indian Penal Code
- Sections 7 and 25 – Arms Act.
Source:DELHI HIGH COURT
Also Read- (DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS 21 JANUARY 2025)
WRITTEN BY – Veera Syamala Devi Nandikanuma
EDITOR – Vishakha Khatri
