R D Sharma & Sharma Associates

R D Sharma & Sharma Associates Get solution for your all criminal and civil problems.........

08/02/2026

While affirming that issuance of a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS is mandatory for offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, the Supreme Court clarified that an arrest under Section 35(6) can be made even after such notice only based on fresh materials that were not available to the police officer at the time the Section 35(3) notice was issued.
"While making an arrest under Section 35(6) of the BNSS, 2023, after the stage of issuing a notice seeking presence under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023, the circumstances and factors that were in existence at the time of issuing the said notice shall not be taken into consideration by a police officer while making an arrest subsequently. In other words,for effecting an arrest under Section 35(6) of the BNSS, 2023, it must be based upon materials and factors which were not available with the police officer at the time of issuing a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023,” the Court clarified.
Section 35(3) of BNSS mandates the police official to send a notice to an accused to appear before the police. Section 35(6) BNSS empowers the police to arrest a person who fails to comply with Section 35(3) BNSS notice, i.e., to appear before the police officer or fails to identify himself to the police.
The Court cautioned that "the power of arrest under Section 35(6) of the BNSS, 2023 is to be exercised sparingly."
It may be noted that in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (II), 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 751, a bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh held that non-compliance with a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS does not automatically justify arrest. The Court emphasised that arrest is a measure of last resort, to be exercised by the investigating agency only after applying its mind to the necessity of arrest. However, the bench did not examine whether, while effecting an arrest under Section 35(6) of the BNSS, the police officer is required to rely on fresh material or factors distinct from those considered at the stage of issuing the Section 35(3) notice.
This is what precisely clarified by the bench in this ruling i.e., Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (III), holding that “while making an arrest under Section 35(6) of the BNSS, 2023, after the stage of issuing a notice seeking presence under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023, the circumstances and factors that were in existence at the time of issuing the said notice shall not be taken into consideration by a police officer while making an arrest subsequently.”
Also, the court issued a direction to the police officials that their “power of arrest under Section 35(6) read with Section 35(1)(b) of the BNSS, 2023, pursuant to a notice issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 is not a matter of routine, but an exception, and the police officer is expected to be circumspect and slow in exercising the said power.”
Also From Judgment: Arrest Exception, Not Rule For Offences Punishable Up To 7 Yrs; S.35(3) BNSS Notice Mandatory In Such Cases : Supreme Court
Cause Title: SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 114
Click here to download order

01/02/2026

अपंजीकृत रिलीज़ डीड के आधार पर दावा डिग्री नहीं किया जा सकता है अपंजीकृत रिलीज़ डीड साक्ष्य में नहीं लिया जा सकता
RBJ 2024 Page 692
सुप्रभात आपका दिन मंगलमय हो

01/02/2026

डिक्लेरेशन के दावे को फाइल करने की कोई मियाद नहीं है

मौखिक साक्ष्य के आधार पर कबजा साबित नहीं किया जा सकता
RRT 2020 page 524

01/02/2026

प्रभावित पक्षकार को बिना सुने रास्ता प्रदान नहीं किया जा सकता
RRT 2022 Page 1022 HC
सुप्रभात आपका दिन मंगलमय हो

01/02/2026

UPCOMING ATTRACTIONS IN THE
MONTH March'2025
Cr.L.R 2025 ISSUE
HIGHLIGHTS....
✔️📚 [A] Once the person who identifies the accused during the TIP is not produced as a witness during trial, the TIP is of no use to sustain an identification by some other witness. [B] Seizure of pistol after 9 hours of the arrest is suspicious when he was arrested with the pistol in possession.—Vinod @ Nasmulla Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 326
✔️📚 Long uninterrupted physical relationship show the consensual sexual intercourse.—Mahesh Damu Khare Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 332
✔️📚 [A] Order of taking cognizance against a public servant in absence of the prosecution sanction is bad in law. [B] No concept of deemed prosecution sanction under the P.C. Act.—Suneeti Toteja Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 344
✔️📚 No offence is made out when the vendor did not transfer the rights or share of the complainant nor executed the sale deed on his behalf.—Jit Vinayak Arolkar Vs. State of Goa & Ors., 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 355
✔️📚 The interference with the finding of acquittal recorded by the learned trial judge would be warranted by the High Court only if the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity.—Constable 907 Surendra Singh & Anr. Vs. State of Uttarakhand, 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 390
✔️📚 Mere filing of a charge sheet is not a ground for refusal to exercise the jurisdiction under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C.—Abhishek Mishra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 397
✔️📚 Howsoever serious a crime may be the accused has a fundamental right of speedy trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.—Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 398
✔️📚 [A] A child of tender age can be allowed to testify if he has intellectual capacity to understand questions and give rational answers thereto. [B] Delay in recording statement under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. is not a sole ground to reject the testimony.—State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Balveer Singh, 2025 Cr.L.R. (SC) 402
✔️📚 When the victim was above 18 years and stated nothing against the accused, order of conviction can be stayed in case of a Government employee.—Kana Ram Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan Thro’ P.P., 2025(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 306

01/02/2026

Civil Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit when the subject matter is an agricultural land.
2025(2) RRT (HC) 759

01/02/2026

In absence of the possession and khatedari rights, the plaintiff is not entitled to temporary injunction.
2025(2) RRT (BOR) 777
Good morning
Advocate Sunil Karwasra
Board of revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer

01/02/2026

जब तक भूमि उपयोग में परिवर्तन की अनुमति नहीं दी जाती है, तब तक कृषि भूमि पर निर्माण की अनुमति नहीं है।

2025(2) आरआरटी (एससी) 734

01/02/2026

शामलाती जमीन के बंटवारे में हर सहखातेदार को भूमि में पहुंचने के लिए रास्ता रखने के आज्ञापक प्रावधान है
RRT 2025 Page 885

01/02/2026

Civil Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit relating to agricultural land.

*2025(2) RRT (HC) 761*

01/02/2026

Women of Scheduled Tribe are not entitled to any right, title or interest in the property since Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is not applicable.

*2025(2) RRT (BOR) 834*

01/02/2026

Entry in the Jamabandi would be treated as correct.

*2025(2) RRT (BOR) 866*

Address

2524, Laton Ka Chowk, 5th Crossing Govind Rao Ji Ka Rasta Chandpole Bazar
Jaipur
302001

Opening Hours

Monday 10am - 8pm
Tuesday 10am - 8pm
Wednesday 10am - 8pm
Thursday 10am - 8pm
Friday 10am - 8pm
Saturday 10am - 8pm

Telephone

+919828391634

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when R D Sharma & Sharma Associates posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to R D Sharma & Sharma Associates:

Share