1. Memorandum of family arrangement is not required to be registered

2. Mere signing of a will as a witness would not per se amount to compliance of
Section 63 (c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, as ‘animo attestandi’.

3. The testimony of the victim is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty in acting upon sole testimony of the victim of
sexual assault to convict the accused provided her testimony inspires confidence and is found to be reliable.

4. The Court cannot direct the legislature to enact a particular law for
reason that under the constitutional scheme Parliament exercises
sovereign power to enact law and no outside power or authority can
issue a particular piece of legislation.

5. The executive instruction cannot override the statutory
provision but they are meant to supplement the law or to carry
out the provisions of law.

6. Under S. 304-A IPC, no minimum sentence is prescribed. The sentence can
also be limited to fine without any term of imprisonment.

7. The practice to file review petition without any substantial error apperant on the face of record, that too; with change of counsel is not conductive to healthy practice of the bar, which has the responsibility to maintain the salutory practice of profession.

8. The scope of review is limited under the guise of review, the petitioner cannot be permitted to reagitate and reargue the case, which has already been addressed and decided.

9. Fiscal provisions must, where reasonably possible, be interpreted in a manner consistent with constitutional guarantees.

A statutory condition, though couched in mandatory language, cannot be enforced where compliance is factually impossible or where the very premise on which the condition operates does not exist.

10. Where the prosecution relied upon electronic evidence such as alleged ransom calls, call detail records and CCTV footage to establish kidnapping for ransom and allied offences, but failed to produce the mandatory certificate under Section 65-B(4) of the Evidence Act, such electronic evidence would be inadmissible in law.