The Supreme Court ruled that a High Court cannot enhance a convict’s sentence on its own. It stated, “HC can’t enhance sentence or act as revisional court without appeal by State or victim.”
The Supreme Court admonished high courts against personal critiques of trial judges when addressing judicial errors, recognizing the significant case backlog and low judge-to-population ratio. It emphasized that while correcting judgments is necessary, personal remarks can create prejudice, stressing the need for systemic support rather than individual criticism of judges.
On 8th May: The Supreme Court referred the issue of recovering time-barred debts to a three-judge bench due to conflicting judgments. The matter arose from appeals against a 2015 Punjab and Haryana High Court verdict allowing the recovery of such debts through debt-recovery laws. The appellants and respondents were represented by multiple advocates. The Supreme Court’s three-judge bench will provide an authoritative ruling.