Mothering Justice’s Post

While the intention to prevent undue hardship on individual is Nobel; India, like many other nations, grapples with a diverse range of criminal activities, from white collar crimes to serious offences against humanity. Each case presents a unique challenge and decision to issue a non bailable warrant often hinges on the severity of the offence and the risk posed by the accused. However, by imposing stringent criteria for the issuance of non bailable warrants, we risk undermining the very essence of justice and impeding the effective functioning of law enforcement agencies. In a country as vast and complex as India, where logistical challenges and bureaucratic hurdles are prevalent, such restrictions could potentially hinder the timely apprehension of the suspects and the gathering of crucial evidence. Moreover, the notion that only heinous crimes warrant the issuance of non bailable warrants overlooks the prevalence of sophisticated criminal activities that may not fall under the definition of ‘heinous’. White collar crimes, financial frauds, cybercrimes and other offences can have a far reaching consequences for individuals, businesses and the economy. Additionally, the risk of evidence destruction cannot be sole detriment for issuing non bailable warrants. It is important to strike a balance rather blanket restrictions, where all can site this as a way out in the court of law. #lawandorder #judicialreform

The casual issuance of non-bailable warrants (NBWs) by Courts, despite explicit directives from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has long been a concern. Emphasizing that NBWs should not be issued casually or hastily, the Hon'ble Apex Court has, underscoring the need for judicial discretion and diligence, reiterated that the NBWs shall not be issued unless there are chances of absconding of accused or there is apprehension of tampering of evidence The Hon'ble Supreme Court has earlier in the case of 'Inder Mohan Goswami and Another v. State of Uttaranchal and Others, (2007) 12 SCC 1' culled out the directions for issuance of NBWs in complaint cases, wherein it was held that, at the first instance, the court should direct serving of the summons along with the copy of the complaint. If the accused seem to be avoiding the summons, the court, in the second instance should issue bailable- warrant. In the third instance, when the court is fully satisfied that the accused is avoiding the courts proceeding intentionally, the process of issuance of the non-bailable warrant should be resorted to. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has further stated that personal liberty is paramount, therefore, we caution courts at the first and second instance to refrain from issuing non-bailable warrants. The power being discretionary must be exercised judiciously with extreme care and caution. The court should properly balance both personal liberty and societal interest before issuing warrants. There cannot be any straight-jacket formula for issuance of warrants but as a general rule, unless an accused is charged with the commission of an offence of a heinous crime and it is feared that he is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the process of law, issuance of non-bailable warrants should be avoided. The Court should try to maintain proper balance between individual liberty and the interest of the public and the State while issuing non-bailable warrant. #Supremecourt #law #Advocate #Nonbailablewarrants #livelaw #sinhaandpartners #SC #NBWs #judgment #recentjudgment

When a court order is not obeyed, proceedings to enforce compliance become crucial. Committal proceedings may be an effective solution, as the party failing to comply with the order may be penalised with a fine or imprisonment. Understand the principles, procedures, and notable cases of using committal proceedings to compel court compliance. Join our webinar to unravel the mechanisms behind this enforcement method and gain insights into its practical applications. Register here: https://lnkd.in/gFfNuNxb

We did an interesting piece on the jurisdiction to issue cases against John Doe in Ireland. A recent Supreme Court decision has confirmed that commencing and continuing proceedings against defendants referenced as ‘persons unknown’ is exceptional and that once the relevant individuals become known the proceedings should be amended to identify them by name. We review the implications of this decision. https://lnkd.in/evwratgY #MHCLaw #LegalUpdate #DisputeResolution #Litigation

The Supreme Court Today (4 March) held that MPs and MLAs do not enjoy immunity from prosecution for taking bribe to make a speech or cast a vote in the legislature. Read More: https://lnkd.in/dRYNW6ps #supremecourtofindia #cjichandrachud #SupremeCourtofindia #Bribes #MemberofParliament #LegalReforms #ordertoday

Limitation Act, 1963 – Condonation of delay - Supreme Court summarizes the legal position relating to Limitation and condonation of delay 2024 KHC OnLine 6197

Great Insight

Update on protecting your business against the CTA.

A recent Supreme Court decision has confirmed that commencing and continuing proceedings against defendants referenced as ‘persons unknown’ is exceptional and that once the relevant individuals become known the proceedings should be amended to identify them by name. We review the implications of this decision. #MHCLaw #LegalUpdate #DisputeResolution #Litigation

What is federal question jurisdiction? Jurisdiction given to federal courts in cases involving the interpretation and application of the U.S. Constitution, acts of Congress, and treaties. Charged with a federal crime? Save this post for later! #criminallaw #criminallawyers #criminaldefenselawyer #newyorklaw #legaladvice #criminaladvice