Re Legal

1

Relationship turning sour cannot be ground to book man for rape on false promise of marriage: Supreme Court
The Court observed that such cases not only burdens the Courts but also brings disrepute to an individual accused of such a heinous offence.
1

AR Rahman faces setback in copyright suit before Delhi High Court over 'Veera Raja Veera' song. Among other directions, the Court also ordered Rahman and Madras Talkies to deposit ₹2 crore with the Registry during the pendency of the copyright suit.
1

Supreme Court pulls up Rahul Gandhi for remarks against Savarkar but stays summons. The Court warned Gandhi that it will initiate suo motu action if he makes similar statements.
1

Savarkar defamation case: Pune court allows plea by Rahul Gandhi to bring historical evidence on record. Since Gandhi has claimed that his statements were based on historical facts, the trial would have to be held as a summons trial to allow detailed evidence and cross-examination of witnesses, the Court said.
1

Delhi court says Medha Patkar will not be jailed for defaming Delhi LG VK Saxena
Medha Patkar was sentenced to five months in jail by the trial court. However, the sessions court said the offence was not grave enough to warrant imprisonment.

Today’s

Child Witness’ Silence Not Detrimental to Prosecution’s Case
The Supreme Court held that a conviction in a rape case does not expressly hinge on the statement of the minor victim or child witness. It can be secured based on other available evidence. The Rajasthan High Court had acquitted a person, reasoning that the child witness had submitted no statements upon examination. No other testimony was afforded. The Supreme Court reversed the High Court’s judgement and convicted the accused. It held that the absence of the prosecutrix’s evidence does not always disadvantage the prosecution’s case. Other evidence, including the medical evidence used to convict in this case, is sufficient to secure a conviction. State of Rajasthan v Chatra 18 March 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 360 | 2025 SCO.LR 6(3)[13] Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol Read the Judgment here. Case Comment: The child witness (victim), it is true, has not deposed anything about the commission of the offence against her. When asked about the incident, the trial Judge records that ‘V’ was silent, and upon being further asked, only shed silent tears and nothing more. Nothing could be elicited from the testimony regarding the commission of the offence. This, in our view, cannot be used as a factor in favour of the respondent. The tears of ‘V’, have to be understood for what they are worth. This silence cannot accrue to the benefit of the respondent. The silence here is that of a child. It cannot be equated with the silence of a fully realised adult prosecutrix, which again would have to be weighed in its own circumstances. It has been held in Hemudan Nanbha Gadhvi v. State of Gujarat, that a nine-year-old prosecutrix turning hostile would not be a fatal blow to the prosecution case when other evidence can establish the guilt of the accused. In these facts, ‘V’ has not turned hostile. Trauma has engulfed her in silence. It would be unfair to burden her young shoulders with the weight of the entire prosecution. A child traumatized at a tender age by this ghastly imposition upon her has to be relieved of being the basis on which her offender can be put behind bars. Held, The respondent-accused is directed to surrender before the competent authority within four weeks from the date of this judgment, to serve out the sentence as awarded by the learned Trial Court, if not already served. Subscribe to our updates now and be the first to know about the latest news and developments. Subscribe here: https://relegal.in/subscribe/ #legalcousel #legalawareness #legaladvice #silenceofchildwitness #medicalevidence #otherevidence #conviction #weakcase #hostile Key words/phrases: Rajasthan High Court—acquits accused due to silence of child witness—Appeal to the Supreme Court—Supreme Court sets aside Judgment—Other evidence sufficient to secure conviction—Medical Evidence

Yesterday’s

Accused Persons do not have an Absolute Right to a Narco-analysis Test
The Supreme Court held that an accused person does not have an indefeasible right to seek a narco-analysis test to lead the evidence. The decision brings clarity to the law following several conflicting High Court judgements on the issue. The Patna High Court had allowed narco-analysis tests for all the accused persons in a dowry harassment and kidnapping case. The High Court was hearing a plea for the grant of regular bail by the accused persons. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court had exceeded the scope of a bail hearing by approving a narco-analysis test. Further, they reiterated Selvi v State of Karnataka (2010), where the Court had held that a narco-analysis test cannot form the sole basis of conviction. Amlesh Kumar v The State of Bihar 9 June 2025 Citations: 2025 INSC 810 | 2025 SCO.LR 6(2)[10] Bench: Justices Sanjay Karol and P.B. Varale Read the Judgement here. Case Comment Held, The accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narco- analysis test at an appropriate stage. We deem it appropriate to add, that the appropriate stage for such a test to be conducted is when the accused is exercising his right to lead evidence in a trial. However, there is no indefeasible right with the accused to undergo a narco- analysis test, for upon receipt of such an application the concerned Court, must consider the totality of circumstances surrounding the matter, such as free consent, appropriate safeguards etc., authorizing a person to undergo a voluntary narco-analysis test. Subscribe to our updates now and be the first to know about the latest news and developments. Subscribe here: https://relegal.in/subscribe/ #legalcousel #legalawareness #legaladvice #defaulter #voidsale #righttochallenge #loan #security Key words/phrases: Narco-analysis test—Patna High Court approved test in bail hearing—Supreme Court set aside HC Order—Held that narco test cannot be sole basis for conviction—no absolute right of accused to seek narco test

Terms And condition