India's Direct Tax Collections Surge 15.6% to ₹27 Lakh Crore in FY 2024-25

Image
India's direct tax collections have showcased remarkable resilience and strength, growing by 15.59% in the financial year 2024-25 , according to data released by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) . The gross direct tax mop-up rose to ₹27.02 lakh crore , up from ₹23.38 lakh crore recorded in FY 2023-24. Key Highlights of the Tax Collections Corporate Tax collections grew from ₹11.31 lakh crore to ₹12.72 lakh crore . Non-Corporate Tax collections surged from ₹11.68 lakh crore to ₹13.73 lakh crore . Securities Transaction Tax (STT) receipts witnessed an impressive jump from ₹34,192 crore to ₹53,296 crore . Wealth tax and other minor direct taxes saw a dip from ₹4,068 crore to ₹3,366 crore . After adjusting for refunds (which increased by 26.04% to ₹4.76 lakh crore ), the net direct tax collections stood at ₹22.26 lakh crore , reflecting a healthy 13.57% growth compared to last year’s ₹19.60 lakh crore. This strong performance indicates a buoyan...
Post a Comment

Supreme Court Criticises Allahabad High Court's "Victim Invited Trouble" Remark in Rape Case


Apex Court Cautions Against Insensitive Judicial Language

In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has strongly criticised the Allahabad High Court for making inappropriate remarks in a rape case, particularly the observation that the complainant "invited trouble" by accompanying the accused to his house after consuming alcohol.

A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih addressed the matter during a hearing on Tuesday. The Supreme Court bench cautioned judges against making such insensitive and unsubstantiated remarks in cases involving sexual violence. Justice Gavai emphasized that while bail decisions depend on the facts of each case, judges must exercise care and discretion in how they phrase their orders, especially when they relate to the complainant.

“Yes, bail can be granted, but what is this discussion that she herself invited trouble? One has to be careful when saying such things, especially on this side,” said Justice Gavai.

Solicitor General Stresses on Judicial Sensitivity

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, present during the hearing, reiterated the need for ensuring that complete justice is both done and seen to be done. He emphasized the importance of considering public perception when courts make such statements, especially in sensitive cases like sexual assault.

Background: High Court Order and Controversy

The Supreme Court was responding to a recent order from the Allahabad High Court, which granted bail to a rape accused while making a controversial observation that the complainant had "invited trouble." This statement has triggered widespread criticism from legal experts, women’s rights activists, and civil society members, citing its regressive tone and lack of sensitivity.

The case became part of a larger discussion on judicial conduct after the apex court took suo motu cognizance of another incident involving the same High Court. In that case, the Allahabad High Court reduced the charges in a POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) case, arguing that actions like groping and attempting to pull down a minor’s clothing did not amount to rape or attempted rape.

Supreme Court's Earlier Intervention

The Supreme Court had stayed the March 17 order of the High Court, stating that it demonstrated a “lack of sensitivity” on the part of the judge. The top court had described it as a "serious matter" and expressed concern over the insensitivity shown by the judicial order. The case was brought to the Chief Justice’s attention by senior advocate Shobha Gupta, representing the organisation We the Women of India.

The court also issued notices to the Centre, State of Uttar Pradesh, and other parties involved. The Attorney General of India R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta were asked to assist in the matter.

Details of the High Court’s Controversial Modification

In the March 17 order, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra of the Allahabad High Court had downgraded charges against the accused, previously booked under Section 376 IPC (rape) and Section 18 of POCSO (attempt to commit an offence). Instead, the judge directed that the accused be tried under Section 354-B IPC (criminal force with intent to disrobe) and Sections 9/10 of POCSO (aggravated sexual assault).

The High Court stated that the accused grabbing the victim’s breasts and attempting to remove her clothes did not, in itself, constitute an intent to commit rape, as no further steps were taken by the accused and they fled when witnesses intervened.

Legal and Social Implications

The Supreme Court’s response underscores a growing concern about judicial insensitivity in cases involving sexual violence. This is not the first time that remarks made by judges during bail hearings or while passing orders have sparked public outrage. The top court’s intervention serves as a strong reminder for the judiciary to avoid victim-blaming language, which may further traumatise survivors and undermine trust in the justice system.

The matter has now been adjourned for four weeks, with the Supreme Court expected to continue reviewing the broader issue of how sexual violence cases are interpreted and adjudicated in Indian courts.


Location: Pune, Maharashtra, India

Comments

Post a Comment