SUPREME COURT · WHY THE REASONING MATTERS
Examine the statutory choices and factual distinctions which explain the Supreme Court’s conclusions relevant to Criminal Lawyers in Supreme Court of India. Use those reasons to connect a petition’s ground with the supporting principle while preserving the qualifications that define its reach.
Search all judgments and articles
Explore a judgment: Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab
The Court explains why appearance bonds and cancellation of attendance warrants are not bail. Further custody of named accused after PMLA cognizance required recourse to the Special Court rather than automatic arrest.
Bail ConditionsRead entryThe Court explains why liberty protection must connect arrest necessity with proportionate attendance process. Workable conditions and timely adjudication preserve that protection beyond the initial release decision.
Regular BailRead entryThe Court explains why the robbery and insult allegations had to disclose their particular statutory ingredients. The surrounding circumstances supported quashing despite the separate possibility of an intimidation allegation.
Quashing FIRRead entryThe Court explains why a detailed company payment dispute did not establish the project manager's individual offence. Contractual relationships and vague collective accusations were insufficient to sustain his prosecution.
Quashing FIRRead entryThe Court explains why a police report must connect roles with supporting material. Different deficiencies justified different outcomes for the sale prosecution, anticipatory bail and defective institutional process.
Quashing Summoning OrdersRead entryThe Court explains why overlapping official roles did not automatically destroy investigative authority. Actual bias, procedural safeguards and the evidence still required evaluation in the individual prosecution.
InvestigationRead entry