Legal Articles

Judicial separation under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 allows married spouses to live separately without legally ending their marriage. It may be sought on grounds recognised under the Act, including grounds available for divorce. Once a decree is granted, the spouses are no longer obligated to cohabit, while the marriage itself continues. Judicial separation can provide time for reconciliation, but if cohabitation is not resumed for the statutory period, it may subsequently become a ground for seeking divorce.

Section 149 concerning collective liability for an unlawful assembly was a provision of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), not the Code of Criminal Procedure. It made every member of an unlawful assembly potentially liable for an offence committed by another member when that offence was committed in pursuit of the assembly’s common object, or was one the members knew was likely to be committed. Liability depended on factors such as membership of the unlawful assembly, the common object, and the connection between that object and the offence committed. The IPC has since been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Section 379 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 provided a specific right of appeal to the Supreme Court of India where a High Court, on appeal, reversed an order of acquittal, convicted the accused, and sentenced the person to death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for ten years or more. The provision served as an important safeguard by allowing serious convictions entered by a High Court after reversal of acquittal to receive further judicial scrutiny. Since 1 July 2024, the CrPC has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

Derogatory or false complaints made to a person’s employer can seriously affect professional reputation, employment, and career prospects. Indian law may provide remedies when such allegations are false, malicious, or deliberately intended to damage someone’s reputation. However, not every complaint amounts to defamation, particularly when it is made in good faith to a competent authority for a legitimate purpose. Courts generally examine the truth of the allegations, intention of the complainant, manner of communication, and resulting reputational harm when determining legal liability.

Adverse possession is a principle of Indian property law under which a person in possession of another’s property may acquire legal rights after possessing it openly, continuously, exclusively, and hostile to the true owner’s title for the prescribed limitation period. Mere long-term occupation or possession with the owner’s permission is not enough. The person claiming adverse possession must prove the necessary legal requirements with clear evidence. The concept is closely connected with the Limitation Act, 1963, and courts generally apply its requirements strictly.

Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) dealt with aggravated forms of robbery or dacoity where, at the time of committing the offence, the offender used a deadly weapon, caused grievous hurt, or attempted to cause death or grievous hurt. The provision prescribed a minimum imprisonment of seven years, reflecting the seriousness of violence or the threat of serious harm during such offences. Liability under this provision depended on the individual offender’s conduct. Since 1 July 2024, the IPC has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).