Criminal Law is not a weapon for selective harassment of citizens â€“ Arnab Goswami bail

Doors of High Court and Supreme Court cannot be closed to a citizen who is able to prima facie establish that instrumentality of State is weaponizing criminal law for his/her harassment. Law cannot be used as a ruse for targeted harassment. Courts have ensure that, they remain first line of defense against deprivation of liberty of citizens and that law does not become a ruse for targeted harassment.

Arnab Goswami, Editor-in-Chief of news channel was arrested for allegedly abetting to commit suicide. As per FIR, deceased-company owner allegedly committed suicide after not getting payment from Mr. Goswami for civil and interior work done for office of accused, despite repeated requests. Prima facie evaluation of FIR however did not establish any ingredients of offence alleged against Mr. Goswami. In such situation, Courts is required to safeguard public interest and also ensure that the due enforcement of criminal law is not obstructed. Doors of Supreme Court cannot be closed to a citizen who is able to establish prima facie that the instrumentality of the State is being weaponized for using the force of criminal law. Courts must ensure that they continue to remain the first line of defense against the deprivation of the liberty of citizens. Deprivation of liberty even for a single day is too much. Courts must always be mindful of the deeper systemic implications of their decisions. Arnab Goswami was finally granted bail.

Human liberty is a precious constitutional value, which is undoubtedly subject to regulation by validly enacted legislation. As such, the citizen is subject to the edicts of criminal law and procedure. But at the same time, Courts should be alive to both ends of the spectrum – the need to ensure the proper enforcement of criminal law and also ensuring that the law does not become a ruse for targeted harassment. There is a pressing need for courts across the judicial hierarchy in India to remedy institutional problem of bail applications not being heard and disposed of with expedition.

Conviction under S. 411 IPC for dishonestly receiving stolen property is invalid when the accused persons are acquitted under S. 379 IPC for theft arising from the same transaction.

AIR 2025 SC 3890 : AIROnline 2025 SC 760 Legal principles "In a criminal prosecution, the initial burden is always on the prosecution to discharge.", "Conviction under Section 411 IPC requires that the property is proved to be stolen property.", "If the prosecution fails to establish

Benefit of maternity leave with allowance to Contractual employee

AIROnline 2022 KER 275 An educational society CPAS is an "establishment" under S. 2(1)(b) of Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, as the term covers any establishment under State law, not only commercial entities. Hence MB Act's applicable to contract employees in establishments like CPAS. Further

Legal Principles Regarding First Appeal S. 96 of Civil P C

AIROnline 2025 MAD 723 "Right of first appeal is a substantive, valuable right and not merely procedural.", "Unless expressly excluded by statute, the right of appeal cannot be limited or taken away by subsequent legislation.", "Appeal is a continuation of the suit.", "Judicial

Read next