Robbery committed by five or more persons acting conjointly.
Explanation
The most serious property offence — robbery committed by a gang of five or more persons, attracting minimum sentences and specific investigation provisions.
The unauthorised downloading, copying, extracting, or stealing of electronic data from a computer system — a civil wrong under Section 43(b) of the IT Act and a criminal offence under Section 66 when done dishonestly or fraudulently.
Explanation
Data theft involves the unauthorised taking of electronic data — confidential customer databases, trade secrets, personal data, source code, financial records. Unlike physical theft (where the original is taken), data theft involves copying — the original remains but the thief now also has it. This creates unique legal challenges. IT Act Section 43(b) penalises 'downloading, copying or extracting any data, computer database or information.' When done dishonestly, Section 66 criminalises it. Additionally: Section 72 IT Act — breach of confidentiality and privacy by an official (person authorised to access data who discloses it without consent); and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — which creates obligations for data fiduciaries to protect personal data.
Statutory Provision
Section 43(b), Information Technology Act, 2000: 'If any person without permission of the owner or any other person who is in charge of a computer — (b) downloads, copies or extracts any data, computer database or information from such computer, computer system or computer network including information or data held or stored in any removable storage medium; he shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation to the person so affected.' Section 66 IT Act: criminal liability when done dishonestly or fraudulently.
The person who is actually aggrieved and who in fact set the law in motion, even if not formally the registered complainant or first informant — recognised by courts as a necessary party in certain criminal proceedings.
Explanation
The concept of 'de facto complainant' arises in practice where the formal complainant (the person who signed the FIR or complaint) may be different from the actual victim or the person who set the law in motion. For example, in cases of robbery, the police officer may be the formal 'informant' in the FIR but the robbery victim is the 'de facto complainant' — the actual aggrieved person whose rights are at stake. In cheque dishonour cases (under Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138), the payee is the de facto complainant. Courts treat the de facto complainant's rights differently from mere witnesses — they may be entitled to notice of bail hearings, to oppose compounding of the offence, and to be compensated.
Statutory Provision
No statutory definition — the term 'de facto complainant' is a judicial usage in Indian criminal law. Recognised in case law including: Vikas v. State of Rajasthan (2014) 3 SCC 321 (de facto complainant's right to oppose bail), and various High Court decisions on cheque bouncing cases (NI Act Section 138).
A formal court decree that declares the legal rights or status of a party — the decree itself is the relief, establishing with the court's authority what the law is as applied to the parties, without necessarily ordering any further action.
Explanation
A declaratory decree is the formal expression of the relief sought in a declaratory suit (Section 34 SRA). The decree declares the plaintiff's right or status, making it conclusive as between the parties (res judicata). Unlike a decree for damages or specific performance, a declaratory decree does not direct the defendant to do or abstain from anything — it simply declares the legal position. However, Section 34 SRA allows the plaintiff to seek 'further relief' in addition to the declaration — if the declaration alone will not provide complete justice, the court may also order further consequential relief (possession, injunction, etc.).
Statutory Provision
Section 34, Specific Relief Act, 1963: 'Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to such character or right, and the court may in its discretion make therein a declaration that he is so entitled...' Section 35 SRA: 'A declaration made under this Chapter is binding only on the parties to the suit, persons claiming through them respectively, and, where any of the parties are trustees, on the persons for whom, if in existence at the date of the declaration, such parties would be trustees.'
A suit under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 seeking a court's declaration of the plaintiff's legal rights or status — without necessarily claiming any consequential relief such as damages or recovery of possession.
Explanation
A declaratory suit under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is one where the plaintiff prays for a declaration that they have a particular right, status, or legal entitlement. The declaration itself is the remedy — it settles legal uncertainty by officially determining the plaintiff's position. Consequential relief (e.g., possession, recovery of money) may be sought in addition to the declaration, but the plaintiff is not compelled to seek consequential relief if they do not need it. The court has discretion to grant or refuse a declaration — it will not declare rights in a vacuum or merely for academic purposes.
Statutory Provision
Section 34, Specific Relief Act, 1963: 'Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to such character or right, and the court may in its discretion make therein a declaration that he is so entitled, and the plaintiff need not in such suit ask for any further relief.'
Criminal offence of making or publishing an imputation to harm another's reputation.
Explanation
The criminal offence of making or publishing a false imputation concerning any person with intent to harm their reputation — subject to ten statutory exceptions including truth for public good.
An indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail when the police fail to file the charge sheet within the statutory period of 60 or 90 days of their arrest.
Explanation
Default bail (also called statutory bail) under Section 187(2) BNSS 2023 arises automatically when the police fail to complete investigation and file the charge sheet within 60 days (for offences punishable with death, life, or ≥10 years) or 90 days (for other offences). Once this period expires and the accused applies for bail offering surety, the right is indefeasible — even subsequent filing of a charge sheet cannot defeat it, as long as the accused made the application before the charge sheet was filed. The Supreme Court has held this right to be a fundamental right, rooted in Article 21.
Statutory Provision
Section 187(2), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: 'If it is not possible to complete the investigation within the period of sixty or ninety days, as the case may be, the accused shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail, and every person released on bail under this sub-section shall be deemed to be so released under the provisions of Chapter XXXV for the purposes of that Chapter.'
An agent who, in consideration of extra commission (del credere commission), guarantees to the principal that third parties with whom the agent deals will pay their debts — the agent bears the credit risk of buyers they introduce.
Explanation
A del credere agent is a commercial agent who takes on the additional responsibility of guaranteeing the solvency of the buyers they introduce to the principal. If the buyer introduced by the del credere agent fails to pay, the del credere agent must pay the principal — they are essentially a surety for the buyer's payment, in addition to acting as an agent for the sale. In return for this extra risk, they receive a higher commission (del credere commission). Del credere agents are common in international trade, where the principal cannot independently assess the creditworthiness of overseas buyers.
Statutory Provision
No specific statutory definition in the Indian Contract Act — a del credere agent is a specialised form of agent under the general law of agency (Sections 182-238 ICA). The del credere obligation is essentially a contract of guarantee (Section 126 ICA) combined with an agency. However, because it is a commercial promise by a businessperson for their own commercial interest, the requirement of written guarantee (Section 126 — 'a guarantee may be either oral or written') is satisfied.
The removal of a company's shares from trading on a stock exchange — voluntary delisting (at the company's initiative) requires an exit offer to public shareholders at a price discovered through a reverse book-building process.
Explanation
Delisting under SEBI (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2021 removes a company's shares from stock exchange trading. Voluntary delisting conditions: (a) special resolution with 90%+ approval; (b) the promoters/acquirers launch a reverse book-building (RBB) process to discover the exit price; (c) a minimum 25% of the non-promoter shareholding must participate in the exit offer and their tendered price must be accepted by the acquirer (otherwise the delisting fails); (d) promoter shareholding post-delisting must be at least 90% (meaning they must acquire at least 90% of total shares). The exit price is the 'floor price' determined through RBB — the minimum price at which sufficient non-promoter shareholders are willing to exit.
Statutory Provision
Regulation 2(1)(h), SEBI (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2021: 'delisting means permanent removal of the equity shares of a listed company from all or any recognised stock exchanges where such shares are listed.' Regulation 8(1): 'A company shall not delist its equity shares unless a special resolution is passed by its shareholders and the number of votes cast by public shareholders in favour of such special resolution is at least 2 times the number of votes cast against it.'
The separation of a business or undertaking from a company into a new or existing entity — the demerged company transfers an 'undertaking' to a 'resulting company,' with shareholders of the demerged company typically receiving shares in the resulting company.
Explanation
A demerger is the corporate law equivalent of a business divorce — a company separates one or more divisions or undertakings from itself. Under the IT Act (Section 2(19AA)), 'demerger' has a specific definition for tax-neutral treatment. Under the Companies Act, it is effected as a scheme of arrangement under Section 230-232. The demerged company transfers an 'undertaking' (a specifically defined concept — must be a going-concern business with substantially all the property and liabilities) to a 'resulting company.' Shareholders of the demerged company receive shares in the resulting company proportionately. The resulting company may be a newly incorporated entity or an existing company.
Statutory Provision
Section 2(19AA), Income Tax Act, 1961: 'demerger, in relation to companies, means the transfer, pursuant to a scheme of arrangement under sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013, by a demerged company of one or more of its undertakings to any resulting company in such a manner that — (i) all the property of the undertaking, being transferred by the demerged company, immediately before the demerger, becomes the property of the resulting company by virtue of the demerger; (ii) all the liabilities relatable to the undertaking, being transferred by the demerged company, immediately before the demerger, become the liabilities of the resulting company by virtue of the demerger; (iii) the property and the liabilities of the undertaking or undertakings being transferred by the demerged company are transferred at values appearing in its books of account immediately before the demerger; (iv) the resulting company issues, in consideration of the demerger, its shares to the shareholders of the demerged company on a proportionate basis...'
India is democratic in that governmental power derives from the consent of the governed, exercised through free and fair elections under universal adult suffrage, with Parliament as the supreme representative body.
Explanation
India is a parliamentary democracy — the government derives its authority from the confidence of the directly elected Lok Sabha. Universal adult suffrage (every citizen 18 years and above can vote — 61st Amendment 1988 lowered voting age from 21 to 18) ensures broad democratic participation. The Election Commission of India (Article 324) is a constitutional body that independently conducts elections. India's democracy is also a 'constitutional democracy' — the elected majority cannot override the Constitution or fundamental rights. Free and fair elections are part of the basic structure of the Constitution (Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain AIR 1975 SC 2299).
Statutory Provision
Article 324(1), Constitution of India: 'The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the offices of President and Vice-President held under this Constitution shall be vested in the Election Commission.' Article 326: Universal adult suffrage — every citizen 18 years and above entitled to vote.
