Goonj – India Law Blog & Insights on Society and Spirituality

YOU SELL YOUR CAR, NOT YOUR LIABILITY The subject matter revolves around a critical legal conflict arising from the definition of "owner" under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act) , specifically in the context of vehicle sales and subsequent third-party accident liability. The core issue is that the law creates a distinction between the actual, commercial ownership (which transfers upon sale and delivery) and statutory ownership (which is strictly tied to the vehicle's registration record). 1. THE STATUTORY POSITION: LIABILITY BY REGISTRATION SECTION 2(30) OF THE MV ACT : This section defines the "owner" as the person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered with the registering authority (RTO). PURPOSE OF THE DEFINITION: The Supreme Court has consistently upheld this definition, primarily to protect third-party victims of road accidents. The law aims to ensure that a victim can easily identify the lega...

THE DOCTRINE OF PROSPECTIVE OVERRULING The bedrock of the common law tradition is the principle of stare decisis, which demands that courts adhere to precedent. When a court departs from this principle and overrules a prior decision, the default expectation is that the new ruling operates retroactively. This retroactivity assumes that the court is merely correcting a mistake and announcing what the law "always was." However, this retroactive application often causes manifest injustice. Imagine a party who entered into a contract or conducted a criminal search in good faith reliance on the old, established law. Applying the new rule backward unfairly punishes or penalizes that reliance, leading to significant systemic disruption, particularly in fields like criminal procedure or property rights. The doctrine of prospective overruling serves as the judicial safety valve for this conflict. It is the power, inherent in appellate courts, to announce a new rule of law while explici...

Is the Court Blind to Defense Evidence? In a democratic functioning of the criminal justice system, society naturally expects a fair procedure for investigation and trial . In fact, Article 21 of the Indian Constitution , which protects the life and personal liberty of every person, envisages the principle of a fair and impartial trial . It is naturally expected that the prosecution upholds principles of fairness from the beginning of a criminal trial. The first stage in a criminal trial is when the accused seeks discharge and the judge has to decide whether to frame charges . At this stage, the judge has to consider whether the evidence at hand shows a sufficient probable cause for the accused to be guilty. For such a consideration to be fair, all material having a bearing on the case should be placed before the court. THE CORE CONFLICT However, in practice, at the stage of disclosure of evidence to an accused, the prosecution is required to present only the material it intends to...

END OF THE WAIT: SC Cracks Down on Long Delays in Reserved Judgements The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has initiated a significant measure to enhance transparency and accountability across the judicial system by demanding detailed reports from all High Courts regarding their timelines for delivering reserved judgements. This move directly responds to the persistent issue of inordinate delays in pronouncing verdicts, which undermines the fundamental right to timely justice. To systematically track and address the problem, the Court has proposed the development of a uniform online dashboard displaying key metrics such as: The date of reserving a case The date of pronouncement The time taken to upload the judgement in the public domain This sweeping directive aims to establish a consistent, performance-based standard for judicial efficiency nationwide. The Supreme Court’s current action is rooted in its landmark judgement — Anil Rai vs State of Bihar (2001) ...

Introduction: The New Custody Dilemma in Indian Bail Law “Police custody to judicial custody and back: Is jail the rule? ” — this question exposes a serious constitutional and procedural concern within India’s criminal justice system. Governed first by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and now by its successor, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS 2023 ) , the law around custody and bail is undergoing a major transformation. This new “custody ping-pong” — moving an accused from Police Custody (PC) to Judicial Custody (JC) and then back to PC — risks making jail the rule, not the exception. The General Rule: Judicial Custody Is the Norm The foundational legal principle has always been clear — detention should ideally be under judicial supervision to protect the accused’s rights and prevent coercion. Police Custody (PC): Limited to a total of 15 days from the date of first production before a magistrate. Granted mainly for investigation, interrogation, or recov...