Legal Dictionary

Narco analysis involves the intravenous administration of sodium pentothal (thiopental sodium — a short-acting barbiturate) to produce a twilight state in which the subject is sedated and their inhibitions are reduced. In this state, the subject is questioned and their responses recorded. The premise: people are less able to consciously fabricate responses when sedated. The problems: the subject may still fabricate (particularly trained or practiced liars), may confuse memories with fantasies, and may be highly susceptible to suggestion. The Supreme Court in Selvi (2010) held narco analysis unconstitutional when compelled — even voluntary narco analysis produces inadmissible results, though facts discovered through the information may be admissible.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

National Emergency under Article 352 is the most serious of the three types of constitutional emergency. When proclaimed, the federal structure virtually disappears — Parliament may legislate for States, the executive power of the Union extends to give directions to States, and all State Legislatures continue to function but subject to Parliament's overriding authority. Fundamental rights under Article 19 (freedoms) stand suspended automatically; Article 359 allows suspension of other fundamental rights by Presidential order. India has declared National Emergency three times: 1962 (Chinese aggression), 1971 (Pakistan War), and 1975 (internal disturbance — the most controversial declaration).

Law permitting preventive detention for national security, public order, and essential services maintenance.

Includes right to be heard and rule against bias.

The NCLAT hears appeals against orders of the NCLT — both in company law matters and in insolvency proceedings under the IBC. Key NCLAT functions: (a) appeals from NCLT orders under the Companies Act 2013 (mergers, oppression, class actions, winding up, etc.); (b) appeals from NCLT orders under the IBC 2016 (CIRP, liquidation, personal insolvency, avoidance transactions); (c) appeals from orders of the Competition Commission of India (CCI). The NCLAT's New Delhi bench is the principal bench; it also has a Chennai bench. Appeals from the NCLAT go to the Supreme Court — by SLP (Article 136) or by a designated statutory appeal in some cases.

The NCLT replaced the Company Law Board (CLB) and the High Court's company law jurisdiction (originally proposed to also include the BIFR — Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction). Constituted under Section 408 CA 2013, the NCLT has nationwide jurisdiction through benches in major cities: Delhi (Principal Bench), Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Ahmedabad, Hyderabad, Allahabad, Chandigarh, Bengaluru, and others. The NCLT has exclusive jurisdiction over: (a) insolvency resolution (CIRP under IBC); (b) liquidation orders; (c) schemes of arrangement (mergers, demergers) under Sections 230-232 CA; (d) oppression and mismanagement (Sections 241-244 CA); (e) class action suits (Section 245 CA); (f) removal of auditor (Section 140); and others.

The NDPS Act, 1985 is India's comprehensive anti-narcotics statute. Key features: (a) Three-tier punishment system based on quantity: small quantity (lesser punishment), between small and commercial quantity (intermediate), and commercial quantity (harshest — 10-20 years RI and fine); (b) Section 37: stringent bail conditions (dual test — prosecution must be heard; court must believe accused not guilty AND not likely to commit further offences); (c) Section 50: mandatory search procedure when accused is a person (not vehicle/place) — must be searched before a gazetted officer or magistrate; (d) Section 67: confessional statements to narcotics officers are admissible (controversially — unlike Section 25 BSA which bars confessions to police); (e) Presumptions under Sections 35, 54: shift burden of proof to accused; and (f) Sections 24-26: forfeiture of property derived from drug offences.

Party whose presence is essential for complete adjudication.

Section 23 BNS 2023 (formerly Section 81 IPC) provides the defence of necessity. The elements: (a) the act must be done without any criminal intention to cause harm; (b) it must be done in good faith for the purpose of preventing other harm to person or property; (c) the harm caused must not be a disproportionate means of preventing the harm avoided. Classic example: a ship's captain throws cargo overboard in a storm to prevent the ship (and persons aboard) from sinking — the cargo owner cannot charge the captain with mischief. The necessity must be genuine — not self-created. The defence is narrow: the harm threatened must be imminent, no alternative means available, and the harm caused must be less than the harm prevented.

A tort consisting of breach of a duty of care owed to the plaintiff, causing damage — the three elements are duty, breach, and resulting damage.

Transfer of negotiable instrument to another.

Nemo dat quod non habet (Latin: 'no one gives what they do not have') is the foundational rule of property transfer: a seller can only transfer what they own. If A steals goods from O and sells them to B, B does not become the owner — A had no title to transfer. This protects original owners from having their property permanently taken without consent. However, significant statutory exceptions exist in commercial contexts to protect bona fide purchasers for value — without these exceptions, commercial certainty would be severely hampered. Section 27 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 codifies the nemo dat rule; subsequent sections provide the exceptions.

Nemo debet bis vexari (also expressed as 'nemo debet bis puniri pro uno delicto' — no one should be punished twice for the same offence) is the foundational principle of double jeopardy protection. In Indian constitutional law, Article 20(2) provides: 'No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.' The principle applies when: (a) the same offence (same legal offence, not merely same facts); (b) prior prosecution; and (c) prior punishment. The rule under Indian law is narrower than the American double jeopardy protection: in India, the bar applies only where both prosecution AND punishment have occurred — an acquittal on the same facts may not bar a subsequent prosecution for a different offence arising from the same facts.

Nemo judex in causa sua (Latin: 'no one a judge in their own cause') is the second cardinal principle of natural justice alongside audi alteram partem. It prohibits: (a) actual bias — where the decision-maker has a financial or other personal interest in the outcome; and (b) apparent bias — where a fair-minded and informed observer would reasonably apprehend that the decision-maker might not be impartial. Under the test established in the House of Lords (Porter v. Magill [2002] — adopted in India), the question is whether a fair-minded observer, knowing the facts, would think there is a real possibility of bias. The rule applies to courts, tribunals, arbitrators, and administrative decision-makers.

A no confidence motion is the Parliament's ultimate expression of displeasure with the government. Under Article 75(3), the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha — when the Lok Sabha passes a no confidence motion, the government must resign. A no confidence motion must be supported by at least 50 members of the Lok Sabha (Rule 198 of the Lok Sabha Rules). A no confidence motion differs from a censure motion in that the former targets the entire government (and requires resignation if passed) while a censure motion targets a specific minister or policy.

Small sum awarded for violation of right without actual loss.

A non-bailable offence is any offence not classified as bailable in Schedule I of the BNSS. In non-bailable cases, bail is not a right but is granted at the court's discretion under BNSS Section 480. Courts consider: the nature of the accusation, the severity of punishment, the accused's criminal antecedents, the possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and flight risk. For certain heinous offences (murder, rape, terrorism), BNSS Section 480(3) creates a presumption against bail — bail may be refused unless the court records specific reasons why it should be granted.

Minor offence in which police cannot arrest without warrant or investigate without Magistrate's order.

Non-compete clauses in India operate in a legally challenging environment. Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 declares agreements in restraint of trade void — with a narrow exception for the sale of goodwill (where a seller of a business can be restrained from competing within specified local limits). Indian courts have consistently held that post-employment non-competes are void under Section 27 — an employee cannot be prevented from working in their profession after leaving a company. The only recognised exception is where the restraint is part of the sale of a business (sale of goodwill). Non-competes during employment (while the employment relationship subsists) are generally upheld — courts recognise a duty of loyalty and non-competition during active employment.