LawLoveLegal

Background of the Case The Supreme Court of India has delivered a significant ruling clarifying the scope of personal liberty under the Constitution, holding that pending criminal proceedings cannot be a ground for indefinitely denying the renewal of a passport . The judgment was delivered by a Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Augustine George Masih , allowing an appeal filed by Mahesh Kumar Agarwal , an accused in a National Investigation Agency (NIA) case related to alleged extortion and terror funding activities in Jharkhand’s coal mining belt. The Court set aside judgments of the Calcutta High Court , which had earlier upheld the refusal of passport renewal by the Regional Passport Office (RPO), Kolkata. Factual Matrix Mahesh Kumar Agarwal’s passport expired in August 2023 . At the time: He was facing trial in an NIA case pending before a Special Court in Ranchi. He was also convicted in a CBI coal block allocation case , though his sentence had been suspended by t...

Introduction In a significant reaffirmation of personal liberty and criminal procedure safeguards, the Bombay High Court has held that an accused cannot be remanded to judicial custody merely for not applying for bail , particularly when the individual was never arrested during investigation and consistently appeared before the court pursuant to summons . The ruling underscores the constitutional limits on judicial power and reinforces the settled principle that custody is a legal status, not a procedural assumption . Background of the Case The ruling arose from a criminal case registered in 2023 , involving allegations that partners of AS Agri and Aqua Limited Liability Partnership defrauded investors of approximately ₹350 crore by promising unusually high returns. Alleged Offences The FIR invoked the following provisions: Section 406, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Criminal breach of trust Section 420, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Cheating Section 427, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhi...

Background of the Case The Allahabad High Court, in a recent ruling dated 7 November , declined to grant police protection to a couple claiming to be in a live-in relationship. The petition was filed by Sonam and her alleged partner (referred to as petitioner no. 2), who sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the woman’s husband and the police from interfering in their lives. The Court emphasized that the woman was still legally married under the Hindu Marriage Act , and therefore, the claimed “live-in relationship” could not be accorded legal protection. Court’s Key Observation: Freedom Cannot Override Legal Rights Freedom vs. Statutory Rights Justice Vivek Kumar Singh held that although an adult has autonomy over personal choices, including relationships, such autonomy is not absolute . The Court clarified that the right to personal liberty under the Constitution cannot be exercised to violate the statutory rights of another person . Quote from the judgment: “A spouse has sta...