Supreme Court: Rape Conviction Possible Without S.376 Charge if POCSO Case Fails on Age Proof  ||  SC: Mere Long Possession Can't Establish Adverse Possession; Hostile Intent is Required  ||  Supreme Court Finds Gaps in FSSAI’s Proposed Warning Labels for Foods High in Fat, Sugar and Salt  ||  Supreme Court Quashes ITS Officer's 'Deadwood' Retirement, Orders Rs. 15 Lakh Payment  ||  Uttarakhand HC: District Magistrate to Establish Public Helpline within 24 Hrs amid Water Pollution  ||  Allahabad HC: Custodial Violence and Molestation Are Crimes, Not Police Duty  ||  Gujarat High Court: Bombay Public Trust Registration is Covered by Section 43 of the Waqf Act  ||  J&K&L HC: Advocates not Above Law, No Immunity from Lawful Police Inquiry  ||  Gauhati HC: Talaq-e-Hasan Valid, Requires Registration under Assam Marriage Act  ||  NCLAT: NCLT President Empowered to Transfer Cases from One Bench to Another    

Kerala HC: In-Court ID is Mandatory, Substantive Proof Even if Witness Personally Knows Accused - (24 Sep 2025)

CRIMINAL

Kerala High Court set aside the conviction of three men for criminal trespass and mischief by fire, noting that the trial court failed to record any in-court identification by prosecution witnesses and that the prosecutor did not ask the witnesses to identify the accused during trial.

Tags : IDENTIFICATION   ACCUSED   SUBSTANTIVE PROOF  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved