SC: Reserved Category Candidate Who Availed Prelims Relaxation Cannot Claim an Unreserved Seat  ||  SC: Public Sector Enterprises Cannot Act Against Retired Employees Without Clear Rules  ||  Supreme Court: Single FIR is Permissible in Mass Cheating Cases Arising From One Conspiracy  ||  SC: Courts Cannot Take Cognizance of Time-Barred Cheque Bounce Cases Without Condoning Delay  ||  SC: Exoneration in Disciplinary Proceedings Does Not Always Bar Criminal Prosecution  ||  SC: Judge Cannot Be Presumed Biased Merely Because a Litigant’s Relative Is Police or Court Staff  ||  Delhi HC: Delays From Medical Review Cannot Justify Ante-Dated Seniority For BSF Candidates  ||  Allahabad HC: Being ‘Proclaimed Offender’ Does Not Completely Bar Grant of Anticipatory Bail  ||  Delhi HC: Abortion by a Married Woman For Marital Discord is Legal under The MTP Act  ||  NCLT Kochi: Fraud Has No Time Limit and Directors Cannot Use Delay As a Defense    

Amanullah and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (12 Apr 2016)

Courts should be liberal in allowing third-party locus standi

MANU/SC/0403/2016

Criminal

Courts should be “liberal in allowing any third party” with a bona fide connection with the matter so long as it ‘advance[s] substantial justice’, the Supreme Court urged. However, such authority was to be with exercised with courts taking due care, it cautioned, to ensure that persons with personal grievances were not allowed to abuse the legal system, nor those who were unconnected with the matter. Rather than enumerate a list of persons who have locus standi, the court tendered that who all would have locus to maintain an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution would depend on the facts of each case.

The Court had heard the appeal against an order of the High Court quashing the cognisance order of the magistrate against a charge of murder. It concluded that the High Court’s decision was in error, on an appraisal of material placed before it. Witness testimony and evidence collected by the investigating officer was correctly considered by the CJM before taking cognisance.

Relevant : Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor MANU/SC/0053/2013 P.S.R. Sadhanantham v. Arunanchalam MANU/SC/0083/1980 Section 482 CrPC Act

Tags : LOCUS STANDI   COGNIZANCE   THIRD PARTY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved