◼️ Condonation of Delay

? Condonation of delay is a discretionary remedy exercised by courts wherein, upon an application made by a party who wishes to have an appeal or application admitted after the prescribed period, the court may condone (overlook) the delay if the party provides a “sufficient cause” that hindered them from filing the appeal or application on time.

? If the court is satisfied with the sufficient cause, it may condone the delay and admit the appeal or application as if no delay had occurred, allowing the matter to proceed on merits rather than being dismissed solely on technical grounds.

◼️ Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963:

? Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 enunciates the principle of condonation of delay.
It states:
“Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period”.

? The Explanation to Section 5 further clarifies that if the appellant or applicant missed any order, practice, or judgment of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period, it may constitute a sufficient cause within the meaning of this section.

Join ?

◼️ The Law on Condonation of Delay

? The Limitation Act, 1963, enacted on 5th October 1963, and effective from 1st January 1964, aims to prescribe the time periods within which existing rights can be enforced in courts of law.

? The Act is based on the Latin maxim "vigilantibus, non dormientibus jura subveniunt," which means that the law assists the vigilant, not those who sleep over their rights.

? However, the Act recognizes that there may be circumstances beyond a litigant's control that prevent them from filing a suit or appeal within the prescribed time limit.

? This is where the concept of "condonation of delay" comes into play.

Join ?

◼️ हैंडराइटिंग बदलने के आप पर पीसीएस जे की कॉपी तलब

? उत्तर प्रदेश लोकसेवा आयोग पर लग रहे हैं गंभीर आरोप

? 200 में से 47 मार्क्स पाने के बाद अभ्यर्थी ने RTI लगाया

? कॉपी देखने पर अंग्रेजी पुस्तिका में हैंडराइटिंग बदली हुई थी तथा एक अन्य कॉपी के कुछ पन्ने फाड़े गए थे।

Join?

◼️ Case related to Section 436A

▪️ Hasan Ali Khan v. State the Bombay High Court (2011) the court was pleased to grant bail to an undertrial prisoner accused under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) after the individual had served half of the maximum term prescribed by the special statute.

? It was held: “Since the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that the case of the Applicant is to be considered in view of the judgment of Bhim Singh v. Union of India, this Court is of the opinion that it would not be necessary to go into the merits of the matter. Hence, this Court believes that by virtue of Section 436-A CrPC, 1973, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail”.

Join ?

◼️ Section 436-A of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

? Section 436-A of the CrPC limits the duration of detention for undertrial prisoners during investigation, inquiry, or trial of an offense not punishable by death to one-half of the maximum imprisonment period specified for that offense under the relevant law.

? Upon reaching this threshold, the court is mandated to release the undertrial on personal bond, with or without sureties.

? Enacted in 2005, this provision addresses the issue of overcrowding in prisons caused by a large population of undertrial prisoners, particularly those facing charges with shorter sentences.

? It offers relief to undertrials by ensuring their release after serving half of the maximum imprisonment period specified for the offense they are charged with, promoting fairness and efficiency in the criminal justice system.

Join ?

☘☘☘
First ask yourself: What is the worst that can happen? Then prepare to accept it. Then proceed to improve on the worst.

" पहले स्वयं से पूछिए: सबसे बुरा क्या हो सकता है? फिर उसे स्वीकार करने के लिए तैयार रहिये.और उसके बाद उस बुरे को कम बुरा करने के लिए प्रयास करिए "

Good Morning ???

◼️ Legal Provision Related to Dying Declaration

▪️ Section 32 (1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 26 (a) of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 covers the following:

▪️Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant. –

? Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases:-

? (1) When it relates to cause of death. – When the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question.

? Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.

Join ?

◼️ Dying Declaration: The term ‘dying declaration’ derived from word ‘leterm mortem’ which means ‘words said before death’.

? Dying declaration means a statement made by a person before the death containing the cause or reason of the death or circumstances of the transaction, which resulted in his/her death.

? The rationale behind the concept of dying declaration is that a person may not lie when he is on the deathbed.

? The concept is originated from the Latin maxim ‘Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire’ which means ‘a man will not meet his maker or God with a lie in his mouth’.

? Dying declaration is admissible in court of law and considered as trustworthy evidence.

? Dying declaration may be in oral or written form and even it made by way of signs or verbal communication.

? The law relating to dying declaration is given under Section 32 (1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA).

? The general rule is that hearsay evidence is not admissible. Unless the evidence tendered is tested by cross-examination, it is not creditworthy. However, Section 32(1) of IEA is an exception to this general rule.

Join ?

☘☘☘
Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any other.

" हमेशा ध्यान में रखिये की आपका सफल होने का संकल्प किसी भी और संकल्प से महत्त्वपूर्ण है "

Good Morning ???

▪️ Important Case Laws on Cruelty

? In Shobha Rani v. Madhukar Reddi (1988) the Supreme Court held that the word cruelty can have no fixed definition.

? In Mayadevi v. Jagdish Prasad (2007), the Supreme Court held that any kind of mental cruelty faced by either of the spouses not just the woman, but men as well can apply for a divorce on grounds of cruelty.

Join ?

◼️ Section 13(1) (i-a) of HMA: This section deals with cruelty as a ground for divorce.

? Prior to the 1976 amendment in the HMA, cruelty was not a ground for claiming divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.

? It was only a ground for claiming judicial separation under Section 10 of the Act.

? By the 1976 Amendment, the Cruelty was made ground for divorce.

? The word cruelty has not been defined in this Act.

? Generally, cruelty is any behavior which causes a physical or mental, intentional or unintentional.

▪️Types of Cruelty:

? According to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in several judgments, there are two types of cruelty.

? Physical Cruelty - violent conduct causing pain to the spouse.

? Mental cruelty – spouse is inflicted with any kind of mental stress or has to constantly go through mental agony.

Join ?

◼️ Law Related to Electronic Voting Machines

▪️History of EVM:

? The idea of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) was first conceived in 1977 and a prototype was developed in 1979 by Electronics Corporation of India Ltd (ECIL).

? After political consensus, EVMs were used on a pilot basis in 1982 for an election in Kerala.

? However, this usage was challenged in the case of A.C. Jose v. Sivan Pillai (1984) and the Supreme Court ruled that the Election Commission couldn't override laws and use EVMs without legal provisions.

▪️Legislative Amendment for EVM Usage:

? Following the Supreme Court's 1984 judgment, the government amended the Representation of the People Act in 1989 by inserting Section 61A to provide legal sanction for using EVMs.

? The constitutional validity of this amendment was upheld by the Supreme Court in All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam v. Chief Election Commissioner (2001).

▪️Legal Provisions for EVMs and VVPATs:

? Several provisions were added to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 related to usage of EVMs like fresh polls due to EVM failure, offences like booth capturing involving EVMs, rules for EVM design, voting and counting procedures etc.

? Amendments were also made in 2013 to introduce VVPAT.

Join ?

▪️The Supreme Court in the matter of Association for Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India and Anr. has held that “The mere suspicion that there may be a mismatch in votes cast through EVMs, thereby giving rise to a demand for a 100% VVPAT slips verification, is not a sufficient ground for the present set of writ petitions to be considered maintainable”.

Join ?

◼️ Lease: Section 105 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (TPA) defines lease.

? It states that a lease of immoveable property is a transfer of a right to enjoy such property, made for a certain time, express or implied, or in perpetuity, in consideration of a price paid or promised, or of money, a share of crops, service or any other thing of value, to be rendered periodically or on specified occasions to the transferor by the transferee, who accepts the transfer on such terms.

◼️Licence: According to Section 52 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 where one person grants to one or more than one person a right to do in or upon a certain immovable property something which would, in the absence of such right, be unlawful, and such right does not amount to an easement or an interest in the property, the right thus created is called a license.

Join ?

◼️ Hindu Undivided Family: A joint family structure includes all members of a Hindu family living together, sharing common ancestral property, and following the principles of Hindu law for managing and partition of family assets.

? Prior to legislative enactments pertaining to Hindus, HUF was governed by two major schools:

▪️ Mitakshara School

? It has ancient roots and is believed to have been formulated by the Indian sage Vijnanesvara, who wrote the Mitakshara commentary on the Yajnavalkya Smriti, an important text in Hindu law.

? One of the central tenets of the Mitakshara school is the concept of coparcenary and joint family property.

▪️Dayabhaga School

? The Dayabhaga school is believed to have been developed by Jimutavahana, a medieval Indian jurist. He wrote "Dayabhaga," commentary on the Yajnavalkya Smriti.

? Unlike the Mitakshara school, which emphasizes coparcenary and joint family property, the Dayabhaga school does not recognize the concept of coparcenary.

Join ?

◼️Coparcener: Any individual born in a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) becomes a coparcener by birth.

? Prior to the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 only males were considered coparceners.

? A daughter however became coparcener after the enforcement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 and she remains a coparcener even after marriage and her children become coparceners in her share after her death.

? Any coparcener, whether minor or an adult, can demand a partition, on behalf of a minor coparcener his/her guardian can demand partition.

Join ?