What did the Supreme Court observe in Renuka Bai v. State of Maharashtra (2006) about the court’s power…
In Renuka Bai v. State of Maharashtra (2006), the Court observed that it could act on its inherent power in the circumstances before it. The ordinary procedure under former…
Choose your answer
What did the Supreme Court observe in Renuka Bai v. State of Maharashtra (2006) about the court’s power to proceed against an approver who wilfully concealed material facts or gave false evidence, where the Public Prosecutor had taken no step?
Answer and explanation
Correct answer D
In Renuka Bai v. State of Maharashtra (2006), the Court observed that it could act on its inherent power in the circumstances before it. The ordinary procedure under former section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure separately required a Public Prosecutor's certificate and High Court sanction for trial for false evidence.
Option feedback
Option A
The Court expressed the opposite view on its power in those circumstances.
Option B
The Court did not assign the power exclusively to the police.
Option C
The Court did not make a police request a prerequisite to the power it described.
Option D
The Court made this observation in the circumstances before it. The statutory route under former section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure separately required Public Prosecutor certification and, for trial for false evidence, High Court sanction.
Practice for these exams
-
All India Bar Examination (AIBE)
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
IIT Kharagpur LL.M. Entrance
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
Punjab Judicial Services
-
CUET PG Law (LL.M.)
Subject revision
-
AILET PG
Subject revision
-
Supreme Court Law Clerk and Research Associate
Subject revision
-
Bihar Judicial Services
Subject revision
-
Uttarakhand Judicial Services
Subject revision