R.K Associate Legal Service

24/03/2026

The Supreme Court upheld that individuals converting to religions outside Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism lose Scheduled Caste status and cannot claim protection under the SC/ST Act

27/02/2026

The Supreme Court rejected the constitutional challenge to Section 20 of the BNSS, holding that eligibility of former judicial officers for prosecution posts did not violate separation of powers

26/02/2026

The Supreme Court issued notice on a PIL alleging rampant misuse of criminal law through fabricated FIRs and false complaints, and sought responses within four weeks

13/02/2026

The Supreme Court has notified the “Guidelines for Designation of Senior Advocates by the Supreme Court of India, 2026”, replacing the 2023 Guidelines in terms of the Court's decision dated May 13, 2025 in Jitender @ Kalla vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr. (2025 INSC 667).

12/02/2026

Supreme Court Censures Allahabad High Court for Granting Bail in Dowry Death Case Without Proper Reasoning

The Supreme Court has set aside a bail order passed by the Allahabad High Court in a dowry death case, strongly criticising the manner in which bail was granted without proper reasoning or consideration of statutory presumptions.

12/02/2026

Expiry clauses inserted for anticipatory bail at inception are unsustainable, the Court said.

12/02/2026

Non-Appearance of Complainant Leads to Acquittal; Fresh Complaint on Same Facts Impermissible: J&K High Court

Jammu, Feb: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has observed that dismissal of a criminal complaint due to the complainant’s non-appearance results in the acquittal of the accused under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), and a subsequent complaint on the same facts is not legally maintainable.

Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed that Section 256 Cr.P.C. clearly mandates acquittal where the complainant fails to appear on the date fixed for hearing, unless the Magistrate finds sufficient reason to adjourn the matter. Such dismissal, the Court held, carries the full legal effect of an acquittal.

Emphasizing the settled position of law, the High Court ruled that once an accused is acquitted in this manner, the complainant cannot circumvent the consequence by filing a fresh complaint based on identical facts, allegations, and offence. The appropriate legal remedy in such circumstances is to challenge the acquittal through an appeal before the competent court.

The observation came while the Court examined the validity of cognizance taken in a second complaint instituted after an earlier complaint between the same parties had already been dismissed for non-prosecution.

Finding the subsequent proceedings unsustainable in law, the Court set aside the impugned order and quashed the complaint along with all consequential proceedings.

12/02/2026

In a road accident case involving the death of a 13-year-old boy, the Supreme Court commuted a three-month sentence under Section 304A IPC, holding that jail is not mandatory

28/01/2026

This is the first judgment interpreting Section 175(4) BNSS ( a new provision which was not there in CrPC). Do not miss reading this !

26/01/2026

Police Cannot Freeze Bank Accounts Without Court Approval: Delhi HC

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has held that police cannot attach or freeze bank accounts without prior approval of a competent court. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav ruled that freezing of bank accounts, being a measure to secure alleged proceeds of crime, cannot be done under Section 106 of the BNSS, which is limited to seizure for evidentiary purposes.

The Court clarified that attachment or freezing of bank accounts can be undertaken only under Section 107 of the BNSS and strictly pursuant to an order of a competent Magistrate, after following due procedure.

Holding that blanket freezing of accounts of persons who are neither accused nor suspects is arbitrary, the Court said such action violates Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. Setting aside the freezing of accounts of Malabar Gold and Diamond Limited, the Court ordered their defreezing, noting that the company was not named in any FIR and no material showed its complicity.

11/01/2026